Researchers in social psychology sometimes frame political disagreement as a pathology or the result of psychological 'causes' rather than legitimate difference, and design experiments that presuppose the researchers' normative conclusions. This can make studies less about describing behavior and more about justifying interventions to change opponents' beliefs.
— If true and widespread, it reframes debates about research integrity, peer review, and regulatory responses to academic claims about politics and persuasion.
José Duarte
2026.04.27
100% relevant
José Duarte’s essay (and his critique of a Jay van Bavel climate‑action study) is the concrete exemplar: he accuses the study of presenting false claims to participants and of operating from the premise that non‑leftists are in need of psychological correction.
← Back to All Ideas