Can I publish a critique of an experiment in a field in which I am not an expert? I found a major flaw in reasoning in a psychological experiment, but I am not even related to psychology, I just attended to that course at my university in my spare time. The flaw I found is strictly logical, and also quite tricky, so I think it is feasible that no one noticed it yet. 

This mistake (if it turns out to be an actual flaw) has huge consequences since a few studies validated the results (by repeatedly committing this mistake) and many psychological sub-fields referenced the study.

I want someone to validate my concerns about that study, and then if possible I want to discover the consequences of that error, and make humble suggestion on how to deal with the situation. If my notice would be published anywhere, I want to make sure my name will be seen in that article. (It would be awesome)

What would be the way to go in my situation if such things can be published at all?

Little Edit:
The error is highly controversial but my point of view should be true. It is similar to the Monty Hall problem.
In order for this to happen, you need two things:


You need to communicate with specialists and convince them that you have identified a logical flaw.  You might worry that they will take your idea without giving you credit, but you shouldn't worry too much about that: the more worrisome scenario is that neither of you will be able to convince the other and it will end with a stalemate.  Without expert advice, it's unlikely that you can present your idea in a way that would be publishable, so talking with experts should be the first step.  (Of course unlikely is different from impossible, but it's best to plan on getting advice.)
Once they understand you, the experts need to care.  Many experiments have loopholes and caveats that are well known to experts but not described in popular accounts or even introductory college courses.  You may end up hearing "Yes, that's logically possible, but it's not a possibility we think is important."  Or "Yes, Jones and Smith pointed that out in a paper last year, but I still think the conclusions are true and the experiment is illuminating."  Using an argument that is not 100% logically air-tight is not in itself a problem outside of pure mathematics.


I'd suggest starting by talking with someone from the course you took (the professor or a teaching assistant).  If all goes well, either you'll convince them that this is new and serious, or they'll convince you that it isn't.