Association for Psychological Science - APS
In this season of ghosts, witches, and everything spooky, APS President Lisa Feldman Barrett takes aim at the hordes of mistaken beliefs she sees continuing to haunt psychological science.
Disappointing to see the incoming
boss so carelessly and venomously misrepresent the state of the art on body attractiveness in this recent piece.
How did evolutionary psych become such a punching bag that the Prez of Psy's major scientific society is fine with publishing trash talk about a reasonable line of scientific inquiry (and the members of her constituency who work on it in good faith)?
Lisa Feldman Barrett
This October, beware of zombie ideas...
explains how "a zombie idea is a view that’s been thoroughly refuted by a mountain of empirical evidence but nonetheless refuses to die, being continually reanimated by our deeply held beliefs," and gives great examples.
Iris van Rooij
"E.g. evo psych have argued for years that waist-to-hip ratio is a phenotypic cue to reproductive success. I’ve always felt there should be a special place in hell (...) for ppl who suggest that waist or hip size predicts anything important about a woman!"
Zombie Ideas in psychology, by
Check out Krasnow's comment (and Barrett reply)
Can we put the idea of “lizard brain” to rest please. As
argues, “...the triune brain, the idea that evolution laid down brain circuitry like sedimentary rock, with reptilian, limbic, and neurocortical layers” is a myth.
Lisa Feldman Barrett debunks "zombie ideas" from the field of psychology.
Zombie Ideas in Psychology: Thoroughly Refuted by Empirical Evidence but Refusing to Die—by Association for Psychological Science (APS) President Lisa Feldman Barrett
“That WtH ratio is a cue to parity has been a longstanding theory in the field, & researchers are continuing to test its many implications. This doesn’t sound like a zombie theory to me, this sounds like science.” —
"It’s time to bury the idea that “male” and “female” are genetically fixed, nonoverlapping categories (i.e., natural kinds)." Really?
How did evolutionary psych become such a punching bag that the Prez of Psy's major scientific society is fine with publishing muddled trash talk about a legit line of scientific inquiry (and the members of her constituency who work on it in good faith)?