this post was submitted on 30 Jun 2025
36 points (100.0% liked)
Hacker News
1901 readers
236 users here now
Posts from the RSS Feed of HackerNews.
The feed sometimes contains ads and posts that have been removed by the mod team at HN.
founded 9 months ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Maier's letter to the editor is not peer reviewed; it counts as opinion, the original authors have not retracted their paper - so the matter is at best "divided"
The original paper might have other issues, e. g. https://statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu/2022/01/07/pnas-gigo-qrp-wtf-approaching-the-platonic-ideal-of-junk-science/
But I'm not here to discuss effect size or quality of sources, I think it is much more important to understand that there is no good proof that nudging enables people to make good, lasting changes, while at the same time offering policymakers an easy and cheap way out of applying uncontested, proven methods that would be a lot more beneficial.