The seven warning signs of bogus science

Submitted by Jason Luoma on April 2, 2006 - 6:45pm
Printer-friendly versionSend by email

Interesting article:

The Seven Warning Signs of Bogus Science By ROBERT L. PARK

1. The discoverer pitches the claim directly to the media.
2. The discoverer says that a powerful establishment is trying to suppress his or her work
3. The scientific effect involved is always at the very limit of detection.
4. Evidence for a discovery is anecdotal
5. The discoverer says a belief is credible because it has endured for centuries
6. The discoverer has worked in isolation
7. The discoverer must propose new laws of nature to explain an observation

Comments

Cool list

Submitted by Steven Hayes on April 2, 2006 - 8:56pm.

This is a very cool list.

It is worth thinking about whether ACt / RFT has any whiff of this in the whole community.

In ACT / RFT, 3-7 are total absent so far as I can see

We are getting a bit of #1 ... mostly in self-help books that are supported by good process data but not much outcome data. I personally think how much of a sin that is depends on what comes next; whether it is defended (or even admitted or known), and also whether the extension turns out to have been wise. So far it appears to be that it is known, admitted, and not rigidly defended, which is good because it keeps the pressure on to finish the empirical process all the way through to outcome. That way, the issue comes down to how quickly the RCTs (etc) will follow and how much future research shows that the extension from things like data on experiential avoidance (etc) was wise. But in all cases I know of at least decent process data was there (e.g., these folks are experiential avoiders; experiential avoidance is related to bad outcomes; ACT can move those processes; it seems as though ACT may help; etc); and it is my sense that the problem will resolve itself within 3-4 years because the outcome research is underway in every early extension area

#2 is absent except that RFT studies, like all basic behavior analysis, can have a severe reception in mainstream experimental
because BA is such a minority and has things like different
experimental designs (etc).

Not too bad of a score card. Still it is worth being careful and self-critical

- S

Steven C. Hayes, University of Nevada