<story><title>Cognitive psychology findings that passed a stringent replicability test (2017)</title><url>https://digest.bps.org.uk/2017/06/05/these-nine-cognitive-psychology-findings-all-passed-a-stringent-test-of-their-replicability/</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>tgv</author><text>The findings may hold, but the conclusions? E.g., take the blurb about the Flanker task:&lt;p&gt;&amp;gt; The task shows how we can’t help but process irrelevant information to a certain degree.&lt;p&gt;No, it doesn&amp;#x27;t. Not with the given information. At best, it shows that we don&amp;#x27;t blank out the area around the target. Is that &amp;quot;irrelevant information&amp;quot;? No. In this particular experiment perhaps, but if that&amp;#x27;s what the conclusion is based on, then that conclusion is limited to one specific artificial task. And while that is relevant for other research, it is not a general conclusion about our cognitive system.&lt;p&gt;But basically what most of these experiments show is that the influence of priming&amp;#x2F;recency on reaction times is real, and it&amp;#x27;s not surprising: everybody finds it, although there is ample evidence that in some conditions slows down reaction. But that&amp;#x27;s it. There&amp;#x27;s no evidence in this list that priming extends to other parts of our behavior. Don&amp;#x27;t forget that the next time someone tries to draw far-reaching conclusions from e.g. the Implicit Association Test.</text></comment>
<story><title>Cognitive psychology findings that passed a stringent replicability test (2017)</title><url>https://digest.bps.org.uk/2017/06/05/these-nine-cognitive-psychology-findings-all-passed-a-stringent-test-of-their-replicability/</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>chapulin</author><text>The distracting stimuli finding—and the fact that processing irrelevant info—slows us down is interesting to think about in the context of trying to make decisions under stress</text></comment>