LA DOMANDA
Why does a lie travel further than the truth?
Una influisce in modo significativo sull’altra? Decidono i tre quarti dei voti espressi.
chiusa · torna alla fase Azioni
Stai guardando come ospite. Inserisci un nome utente per entrare e partecipare.
Le domande sono distribuite tra i gruppi, quindi ricevi quelle assegnate al tuo gruppo — non tutte e 162.
risolte: 161 / 162 da rispondere: 0 perché
Nessuno potrebbe rispondere a diverse centinaia di coppie. Ogni coppia va a un gruppo; una coppia su cui il gruppo si divide passa poi ad altri gruppi, quindi può comparire più tardi nel tuo elenco anche se è partita altrove. Il numero delle risolte include il lavoro di tutti i gruppi, ed è per questo che sale più in fretta di quanto si accorci il tuo elenco.
Ultimo conteggio: decise: 161 · passate ai panel tra gruppi: 0 · contese: 0 · sotto il quorum: 1 — i panel richiedono almeno max(2, 75% del panel) voti espressi; il tuo panel più piccolo ha 15 membri.
There is no body whose job is to be wrong-footed early → influisce su? → Each revision is announced as if it were the position all along
Ancora nessun intervento.
Fase conclusa — lo storico delle coppie e dei voti è qui sopra.Verifica la logica ↗
| Each revision is announced as if it were the position all along | → | Being unable to reproduce a result is not itself publishable | aperta | discuti |
| Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow | → | A correction arrives long after the decision it should have changed | ✓ sì | discuti |
| Nobody keeps a public record of which official claims were later revised | → | Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported | ✓ sì | discuti |
| A correction arrives long after the decision it should have changed | → | Requests for data are answered eighteen months later, if at all | ✓ sì | discuti |
| The few outside are dismissed as cranks by association | → | The bodies that issue guidance also fund those who check it | ✓ sì | discuti |
| The bodies that issue guidance also fund those who check it | → | A correction arrives long after the decision it should have changed | ✓ sì | discuti |
| Once labelled, a claim cannot get a hearing even when the evidence changes | → | Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow | ✓ sì | discuti |
| There is no body whose job is to be wrong-footed early | → | So institutions treat all criticism as one category and answer none of it | ✓ sì | discuti |
| Peer review is three unpaid people on a deadline | → | A researcher who audits a funder's work loses the funder | ✓ sì | discuti |
| Peer review is three unpaid people on a deadline | → | The reply is that release would be misinterpreted by the public | ✓ sì | discuti |
| A genuine critic and a bad-faith one look identical from a distance | → | So institutions treat all criticism as one category and answer none of it | ✓ sì | discuti |
| Each revision is announced as if it were the position all along | → | The reply is that release would be misinterpreted by the public | ✓ sì | discuti |
| Institutions investigate themselves and find nothing | → | A genuine critic and a bad-faith one look identical from a distance | ✓ sì | discuti |
| Each revision is announced as if it were the position all along | → | A researcher who audits a funder's work loses the funder | ✓ sì | discuti |
| The reply is that release would be misinterpreted by the public | → | Institutions investigate themselves and find nothing | ✓ sì | discuti |
| Institutions investigate themselves and find nothing | → | There is no body whose job is to be wrong-footed early | ✓ sì | discuti |
| Each revision is announced as if it were the position all along | → | A genuine critic and a bad-faith one look identical from a distance | ✓ per deduzione | discuti |
| Peer review is three unpaid people on a deadline | → | A genuine critic and a bad-faith one look identical from a distance | ✓ per deduzione | discuti |
| Requests for data are answered eighteen months later, if at all | → | A correction arrives long after the decision it should have changed | ✗ no | discuti |
| Once labelled, a claim cannot get a hearing even when the evidence changes | → | A paper that contradicts the field is reviewed harder than one that confirms it | ✗ no | discuti |
| Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported | → | A paper that contradicts the field is reviewed harder than one that confirms it | ✗ no | discuti |
| A paper that contradicts the field is reviewed harder than one that confirms it | → | Once labelled, a claim cannot get a hearing even when the evidence changes | ✗ no | discuti |
| Once labelled, a claim cannot get a hearing even when the evidence changes | → | Requests for data are answered eighteen months later, if at all | ✗ no | discuti |
| Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported | → | Nobody keeps a public record of which official claims were later revised | ✗ no | discuti |
| The few outside are dismissed as cranks by association | → | Nobody keeps a public record of which official claims were later revised | ✗ no | discuti |
| A correction arrives long after the decision it should have changed | → | The few outside are dismissed as cranks by association | ✗ no | discuti |
| Requests for data are answered eighteen months later, if at all | → | The bodies that issue guidance also fund those who check it | ✗ no | discuti |
| Requests for data are answered eighteen months later, if at all | → | A paper that contradicts the field is reviewed harder than one that confirms it | ✗ no | discuti |
| Nobody keeps a public record of which official claims were later revised | → | The bodies that issue guidance also fund those who check it | ✗ no | discuti |
| Nobody keeps a public record of which official claims were later revised | → | The few outside are dismissed as cranks by association | ✗ no | discuti |
| A correction arrives long after the decision it should have changed | → | A paper that contradicts the field is reviewed harder than one that confirms it | ✗ no | discuti |
| The few outside are dismissed as cranks by association | → | Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported | ✗ no | discuti |
| A correction arrives long after the decision it should have changed | → | The bodies that issue guidance also fund those who check it | ✗ no | discuti |
| Once labelled, a claim cannot get a hearing even when the evidence changes | → | The few outside are dismissed as cranks by association | ✗ no | discuti |
| Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow | → | Requests for data are answered eighteen months later, if at all | ✗ no | discuti |
| Nobody keeps a public record of which official claims were later revised | → | A correction arrives long after the decision it should have changed | ✗ no | discuti |
| The bodies that issue guidance also fund those who check it | → | Once labelled, a claim cannot get a hearing even when the evidence changes | ✗ no | discuti |
| The few outside are dismissed as cranks by association | → | A paper that contradicts the field is reviewed harder than one that confirms it | ✗ no | discuti |
| The few outside are dismissed as cranks by association | → | Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow | ✗ no | discuti |
| Nobody keeps a public record of which official claims were later revised | → | Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow | ✗ no | discuti |
| The few outside are dismissed as cranks by association | → | Requests for data are answered eighteen months later, if at all | ✗ no | discuti |
| Nobody keeps a public record of which official claims were later revised | → | Requests for data are answered eighteen months later, if at all | ✗ no | discuti |
| A paper that contradicts the field is reviewed harder than one that confirms it | → | Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported | ✗ no | discuti |
| The few outside are dismissed as cranks by association | → | A correction arrives long after the decision it should have changed | ✗ no | discuti |
| Requests for data are answered eighteen months later, if at all | → | Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow | ✗ no | discuti |
| The bodies that issue guidance also fund those who check it | → | A paper that contradicts the field is reviewed harder than one that confirms it | ✗ no | discuti |
| Requests for data are answered eighteen months later, if at all | → | Nobody keeps a public record of which official claims were later revised | ✗ no | discuti |
| Requests for data are answered eighteen months later, if at all | → | The few outside are dismissed as cranks by association | ✗ no | discuti |
| A paper that contradicts the field is reviewed harder than one that confirms it | → | Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow | ✗ no | discuti |
| The bodies that issue guidance also fund those who check it | → | The few outside are dismissed as cranks by association | ✗ no | discuti |
| Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported | → | The few outside are dismissed as cranks by association | ✗ no | discuti |
| Nobody keeps a public record of which official claims were later revised | → | Once labelled, a claim cannot get a hearing even when the evidence changes | ✗ no | discuti |
| Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow | → | The few outside are dismissed as cranks by association | ✗ no | discuti |
| Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow | → | Nobody keeps a public record of which official claims were later revised | ✗ no | discuti |
| The bodies that issue guidance also fund those who check it | → | Nobody keeps a public record of which official claims were later revised | ✗ no | discuti |
| A correction arrives long after the decision it should have changed | → | Once labelled, a claim cannot get a hearing even when the evidence changes | ✗ no | discuti |
| The bodies that issue guidance also fund those who check it | → | Requests for data are answered eighteen months later, if at all | ✗ no | discuti |
| Requests for data are answered eighteen months later, if at all | → | Once labelled, a claim cannot get a hearing even when the evidence changes | ✗ no | discuti |
| Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported | → | Requests for data are answered eighteen months later, if at all | ✗ no | discuti |
| Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported | → | Once labelled, a claim cannot get a hearing even when the evidence changes | ✗ no | discuti |
| Once labelled, a claim cannot get a hearing even when the evidence changes | → | The bodies that issue guidance also fund those who check it | ✗ no | discuti |
| Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow | → | Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported | ✗ no | discuti |
| Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported | → | A correction arrives long after the decision it should have changed | ✗ no | discuti |
| Once labelled, a claim cannot get a hearing even when the evidence changes | → | A correction arrives long after the decision it should have changed | ✗ no | discuti |
| Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow | → | Once labelled, a claim cannot get a hearing even when the evidence changes | ✗ no | discuti |
| A paper that contradicts the field is reviewed harder than one that confirms it | → | The bodies that issue guidance also fund those who check it | ✗ no | discuti |
| Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow | → | A paper that contradicts the field is reviewed harder than one that confirms it | ✗ no | discuti |
| The bodies that issue guidance also fund those who check it | → | Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported | ✗ no | discuti |
| Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported | → | The bodies that issue guidance also fund those who check it | ✗ no | discuti |
| Once labelled, a claim cannot get a hearing even when the evidence changes | → | Nobody keeps a public record of which official claims were later revised | ✗ no | discuti |
| The bodies that issue guidance also fund those who check it | → | Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow | ✗ no | discuti |
| A paper that contradicts the field is reviewed harder than one that confirms it | → | Requests for data are answered eighteen months later, if at all | ✗ no | discuti |
| A paper that contradicts the field is reviewed harder than one that confirms it | → | Nobody keeps a public record of which official claims were later revised | ✗ no | discuti |
| A paper that contradicts the field is reviewed harder than one that confirms it | → | The few outside are dismissed as cranks by association | ✗ no | discuti |
| Nobody keeps a public record of which official claims were later revised | → | A paper that contradicts the field is reviewed harder than one that confirms it | ✗ no | discuti |
| A correction arrives long after the decision it should have changed | → | Nobody keeps a public record of which official claims were later revised | ✗ no | discuti |
| Requests for data are answered eighteen months later, if at all | → | Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported | ✗ no | discuti |
| A correction arrives long after the decision it should have changed | → | Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow | ✗ no | discuti |
| Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow | → | The bodies that issue guidance also fund those who check it | ✗ no | discuti |
| The few outside are dismissed as cranks by association | → | Once labelled, a claim cannot get a hearing even when the evidence changes | ✗ no | discuti |
| A correction arrives long after the decision it should have changed | → | Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported | ✗ no | discuti |
| A paper that contradicts the field is reviewed harder than one that confirms it | → | A correction arrives long after the decision it should have changed | ✗ no | discuti |
| Once labelled, a claim cannot get a hearing even when the evidence changes | → | Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported | ✗ no | discuti |
| Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported | → | Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow | ✗ no | discuti |
| You cannot check a claim whose data is not released | → | The reply is that release would be misinterpreted by the public | ✗ no | discuti |
| So institutions treat all criticism as one category and answer none of it | → | A researcher who audits a funder's work loses the funder | ✗ no | discuti |
| Peer review is three unpaid people on a deadline | → | Being unable to reproduce a result is not itself publishable | ✗ no | discuti |
| Each revision is announced as if it were the position all along | → | Peer review is three unpaid people on a deadline | ✗ no | discuti |
| You cannot check a claim whose data is not released | → | So institutions treat all criticism as one category and answer none of it | ✗ no | discuti |
| A researcher who audits a funder's work loses the funder | → | You cannot check a claim whose data is not released | ✗ no | discuti |
| So institutions treat all criticism as one category and answer none of it | → | The reply is that release would be misinterpreted by the public | ✗ no | discuti |
| You cannot check a claim whose data is not released | → | A researcher who audits a funder's work loses the funder | ✗ no | discuti |
| There is no body whose job is to be wrong-footed early | → | A genuine critic and a bad-faith one look identical from a distance | ✗ no | discuti |
| There is no body whose job is to be wrong-footed early | → | Institutions investigate themselves and find nothing | ✗ no | discuti |
| So institutions treat all criticism as one category and answer none of it | → | There is no body whose job is to be wrong-footed early | ✗ no | discuti |
| Being unable to reproduce a result is not itself publishable | → | Peer review is three unpaid people on a deadline | ✗ no | discuti |
| Each revision is announced as if it were the position all along | → | You cannot check a claim whose data is not released | ✗ no | discuti |
| A genuine critic and a bad-faith one look identical from a distance | → | You cannot check a claim whose data is not released | ✗ no | discuti |
| Peer review is three unpaid people on a deadline | → | Each revision is announced as if it were the position all along | ✗ no | discuti |
| You cannot check a claim whose data is not released | → | Institutions investigate themselves and find nothing | ✗ no | discuti |
| A researcher who audits a funder's work loses the funder | → | Each revision is announced as if it were the position all along | ✗ no | discuti |
| A genuine critic and a bad-faith one look identical from a distance | → | A researcher who audits a funder's work loses the funder | ✗ no | discuti |
| So institutions treat all criticism as one category and answer none of it | → | Being unable to reproduce a result is not itself publishable | ✗ no | discuti |
| Being unable to reproduce a result is not itself publishable | → | Institutions investigate themselves and find nothing | ✗ no | discuti |
| A researcher who audits a funder's work loses the funder | → | Peer review is three unpaid people on a deadline | ✗ no | discuti |
| A genuine critic and a bad-faith one look identical from a distance | → | Being unable to reproduce a result is not itself publishable | ✗ no | discuti |
| Being unable to reproduce a result is not itself publishable | → | Each revision is announced as if it were the position all along | ✗ no | discuti |
| Institutions investigate themselves and find nothing | → | Peer review is three unpaid people on a deadline | ✗ no | discuti |
| You cannot check a claim whose data is not released | → | There is no body whose job is to be wrong-footed early | ✗ no | discuti |
| Being unable to reproduce a result is not itself publishable | → | There is no body whose job is to be wrong-footed early | ✗ no | discuti |
| Being unable to reproduce a result is not itself publishable | → | So institutions treat all criticism as one category and answer none of it | ✗ no | discuti |
| So institutions treat all criticism as one category and answer none of it | → | A genuine critic and a bad-faith one look identical from a distance | ✗ no | discuti |
| Institutions investigate themselves and find nothing | → | You cannot check a claim whose data is not released | ✗ no | discuti |
| Institutions investigate themselves and find nothing | → | The reply is that release would be misinterpreted by the public | ✗ no | discuti |
| A researcher who audits a funder's work loses the funder | → | There is no body whose job is to be wrong-footed early | ✗ no | discuti |
| A researcher who audits a funder's work loses the funder | → | Institutions investigate themselves and find nothing | ✗ no | discuti |
| There is no body whose job is to be wrong-footed early | → | Peer review is three unpaid people on a deadline | ✗ no | discuti |
| The reply is that release would be misinterpreted by the public | → | Each revision is announced as if it were the position all along | ✗ no | discuti |
| Each revision is announced as if it were the position all along | → | So institutions treat all criticism as one category and answer none of it | ✗ no | discuti |
| You cannot check a claim whose data is not released | → | Being unable to reproduce a result is not itself publishable | ✗ no | discuti |
| A researcher who audits a funder's work loses the funder | → | A genuine critic and a bad-faith one look identical from a distance | ✗ no | discuti |
| Peer review is three unpaid people on a deadline | → | Institutions investigate themselves and find nothing | ✗ no | discuti |
| There is no body whose job is to be wrong-footed early | → | A researcher who audits a funder's work loses the funder | ✗ no | discuti |
| Institutions investigate themselves and find nothing | → | So institutions treat all criticism as one category and answer none of it | ✗ no | discuti |
| There is no body whose job is to be wrong-footed early | → | The reply is that release would be misinterpreted by the public | ✗ no | discuti |
| There is no body whose job is to be wrong-footed early | → | Being unable to reproduce a result is not itself publishable | ✗ no | discuti |
| A genuine critic and a bad-faith one look identical from a distance | → | The reply is that release would be misinterpreted by the public | ✗ no | discuti |
| A genuine critic and a bad-faith one look identical from a distance | → | Each revision is announced as if it were the position all along | ✗ no | discuti |
| A genuine critic and a bad-faith one look identical from a distance | → | Peer review is three unpaid people on a deadline | ✗ no | discuti |
| The reply is that release would be misinterpreted by the public | → | So institutions treat all criticism as one category and answer none of it | ✗ no | discuti |
| So institutions treat all criticism as one category and answer none of it | → | You cannot check a claim whose data is not released | ✗ no | discuti |
| Being unable to reproduce a result is not itself publishable | → | You cannot check a claim whose data is not released | ✗ no | discuti |
| Institutions investigate themselves and find nothing | → | Each revision is announced as if it were the position all along | ✗ no | discuti |
| The reply is that release would be misinterpreted by the public | → | Peer review is three unpaid people on a deadline | ✗ no | discuti |
| A genuine critic and a bad-faith one look identical from a distance | → | There is no body whose job is to be wrong-footed early | ✗ no | discuti |
| The reply is that release would be misinterpreted by the public | → | Being unable to reproduce a result is not itself publishable | ✗ no | discuti |
| Peer review is three unpaid people on a deadline | → | You cannot check a claim whose data is not released | ✗ no | discuti |
| Peer review is three unpaid people on a deadline | → | There is no body whose job is to be wrong-footed early | ✗ no | discuti |
| There is no body whose job is to be wrong-footed early | → | You cannot check a claim whose data is not released | ✗ no | discuti |
| A researcher who audits a funder's work loses the funder | → | The reply is that release would be misinterpreted by the public | ✗ no | discuti |
| Being unable to reproduce a result is not itself publishable | → | The reply is that release would be misinterpreted by the public | ✗ no | discuti |
| Institutions investigate themselves and find nothing | → | Being unable to reproduce a result is not itself publishable | ✗ no | discuti |
| Institutions investigate themselves and find nothing | → | A researcher who audits a funder's work loses the funder | ✗ no | discuti |
| The reply is that release would be misinterpreted by the public | → | There is no body whose job is to be wrong-footed early | ✗ no | discuti |
| There is no body whose job is to be wrong-footed early | → | Each revision is announced as if it were the position all along | ✗ no | in primo piano ↑ · chiudi ✕ |
| A researcher who audits a funder's work loses the funder | → | So institutions treat all criticism as one category and answer none of it | ✗ no | discuti |
| Being unable to reproduce a result is not itself publishable | → | A researcher who audits a funder's work loses the funder | ✗ no | discuti |
| Each revision is announced as if it were the position all along | → | Institutions investigate themselves and find nothing | ✗ no | discuti |
| Each revision is announced as if it were the position all along | → | There is no body whose job is to be wrong-footed early | ✗ no | discuti |
| A genuine critic and a bad-faith one look identical from a distance | → | Institutions investigate themselves and find nothing | ✗ no | discuti |
| So institutions treat all criticism as one category and answer none of it | → | Peer review is three unpaid people on a deadline | ✗ no | discuti |
| Being unable to reproduce a result is not itself publishable | → | A genuine critic and a bad-faith one look identical from a distance | ✗ no | discuti |
| A researcher who audits a funder's work loses the funder | → | Being unable to reproduce a result is not itself publishable | ✗ no | discuti |
| The reply is that release would be misinterpreted by the public | → | A researcher who audits a funder's work loses the funder | ✗ no | discuti |
| The reply is that release would be misinterpreted by the public | → | A genuine critic and a bad-faith one look identical from a distance | ✗ no | discuti |
| You cannot check a claim whose data is not released | → | A genuine critic and a bad-faith one look identical from a distance | ✗ no | discuti |
| So institutions treat all criticism as one category and answer none of it | → | Each revision is announced as if it were the position all along | ✗ no | discuti |
| You cannot check a claim whose data is not released | → | Peer review is three unpaid people on a deadline | ✗ no | discuti |
| Peer review is three unpaid people on a deadline | → | So institutions treat all criticism as one category and answer none of it | ✗ no | discuti |
| So institutions treat all criticism as one category and answer none of it | → | Institutions investigate themselves and find nothing | ✗ no | discuti |
| The reply is that release would be misinterpreted by the public | → | You cannot check a claim whose data is not released | ✗ no | discuti |
| You cannot check a claim whose data is not released | → | Each revision is announced as if it were the position all along | ✗ no | discuti |