Cấu trúc · Why does a lie travel further than the truth?

CÂU HỎI

Why does a lie travel further than the truth?

Liệu cái này có ảnh hưởng đáng kể đến cái kia không? Ba phần tư số phiếu đã bỏ sẽ quyết định.

Đang xem với tư cách khách. Nhập tên người dùng để vào và tham gia.

Các câu hỏi được chia cho các nhóm, nên bạn nhận những câu được giao cho nhóm mình — không phải cả 162 câu.

vì sao

Không ai trả lời nổi vài trăm cặp thẻ. Mỗi cặp được giao cho một nhóm; cặp nào bị chia rẽ sẽ được chuyển sang các nhóm khác, nên nó có thể xuất hiện trong danh sách của bạn sau này dù bắt đầu ở nơi khác. Số đã ngã ngũ tính cả công việc của mọi nhóm, vì vậy nó tăng nhanh hơn tốc độ danh sách của bạn ngắn lại.

161 / 162 đã ngã ngũ 0 câu chờ bạn trả lời

Lần kiểm phiếu gần nhất: 161 đã quyết · 0 chuyển lên hội đồng liên nhóm · 0 còn tranh cãi · 1 chưa đủ số người tối thiểu — hội đồng cần ít nhất max(2, 75% hội đồng) phiếu đã bỏ; hội đồng nhỏ nhất của bạn có 15 thành viên.

đóng ✕

Requests for data are answered eighteen months later, if at all → ảnh hưởng? → Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow

Chưa ai nói gì.

Giai đoạn đã xong — hồ sơ các cặp thẻ và phiếu bầu nằm ở trên.Kiểm tra lập luận ↗

Each revision is announced as if it were the position all along	→	Being unable to reproduce a result is not itself publishable	đang mở	thảo luận
Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow	→	A correction arrives long after the decision it should have changed	✓ có	thảo luận
Nobody keeps a public record of which official claims were later revised	→	Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported	✓ có	thảo luận
A correction arrives long after the decision it should have changed	→	Requests for data are answered eighteen months later, if at all	✓ có	thảo luận
The few outside are dismissed as cranks by association	→	The bodies that issue guidance also fund those who check it	✓ có	thảo luận
The bodies that issue guidance also fund those who check it	→	A correction arrives long after the decision it should have changed	✓ có	thảo luận
Once labelled, a claim cannot get a hearing even when the evidence changes	→	Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow	✓ có	thảo luận
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	✓ có	thảo luận
Peer review is three unpaid people on a deadline	→	A researcher who audits a funder's work loses the funder	✓ có	thảo luận
Peer review is three unpaid people on a deadline	→	The reply is that release would be misinterpreted by the public	✓ có	thảo luận
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	✓ có	thảo luận
Each revision is announced as if it were the position all along	→	The reply is that release would be misinterpreted by the public	✓ có	thảo luận
Institutions investigate themselves and find nothing	→	A genuine critic and a bad-faith one look identical from a distance	✓ có	thảo luận
Each revision is announced as if it were the position all along	→	A researcher who audits a funder's work loses the funder	✓ có	thảo luận
The reply is that release would be misinterpreted by the public	→	Institutions investigate themselves and find nothing	✓ có	thảo luận
Institutions investigate themselves and find nothing	→	There is no body whose job is to be wrong-footed early	✓ có	thảo luận
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	✓ suy ra	thảo luận
Peer review is three unpaid people on a deadline	→	A genuine critic and a bad-faith one look identical from a distance	✓ suy ra	thảo luận
Requests for data are answered eighteen months later, if at all	→	A correction arrives long after the decision it should have changed	✗ không	thảo luận
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	✗ không	thảo luận
Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported	→	A paper that contradicts the field is reviewed harder than one that confirms it	✗ không	thảo luận
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	✗ không	thảo luận
Once labelled, a claim cannot get a hearing even when the evidence changes	→	Requests for data are answered eighteen months later, if at all	✗ không	thảo luận
Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported	→	Nobody keeps a public record of which official claims were later revised	✗ không	thảo luận
The few outside are dismissed as cranks by association	→	Nobody keeps a public record of which official claims were later revised	✗ không	thảo luận
A correction arrives long after the decision it should have changed	→	The few outside are dismissed as cranks by association	✗ không	thảo luận
Requests for data are answered eighteen months later, if at all	→	The bodies that issue guidance also fund those who check it	✗ không	thảo luận
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	✗ không	thảo luận
Nobody keeps a public record of which official claims were later revised	→	The bodies that issue guidance also fund those who check it	✗ không	thảo luận
Nobody keeps a public record of which official claims were later revised	→	The few outside are dismissed as cranks by association	✗ không	thảo luận
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	✗ không	thảo luận
The few outside are dismissed as cranks by association	→	Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported	✗ không	thảo luận
A correction arrives long after the decision it should have changed	→	The bodies that issue guidance also fund those who check it	✗ không	thảo luận
Once labelled, a claim cannot get a hearing even when the evidence changes	→	The few outside are dismissed as cranks by association	✗ không	thảo luận
Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow	→	Requests for data are answered eighteen months later, if at all	✗ không	thảo luận
Nobody keeps a public record of which official claims were later revised	→	A correction arrives long after the decision it should have changed	✗ không	thảo luận
The bodies that issue guidance also fund those who check it	→	Once labelled, a claim cannot get a hearing even when the evidence changes	✗ không	thảo luận
The few outside are dismissed as cranks by association	→	A paper that contradicts the field is reviewed harder than one that confirms it	✗ không	thảo luận
The few outside are dismissed as cranks by association	→	Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow	✗ không	thảo luận
Nobody keeps a public record of which official claims were later revised	→	Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow	✗ không	thảo luận
The few outside are dismissed as cranks by association	→	Requests for data are answered eighteen months later, if at all	✗ không	thảo luận
Nobody keeps a public record of which official claims were later revised	→	Requests for data are answered eighteen months later, if at all	✗ không	thảo luận
A paper that contradicts the field is reviewed harder than one that confirms it	→	Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported	✗ không	thảo luận
The few outside are dismissed as cranks by association	→	A correction arrives long after the decision it should have changed	✗ không	thảo luận
Requests for data are answered eighteen months later, if at all	→	Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow	✗ không	đang mở ↑ · đóng ✕
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	✗ không	thảo luận
Requests for data are answered eighteen months later, if at all	→	Nobody keeps a public record of which official claims were later revised	✗ không	thảo luận
Requests for data are answered eighteen months later, if at all	→	The few outside are dismissed as cranks by association	✗ không	thảo luận
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	✗ không	thảo luận
The bodies that issue guidance also fund those who check it	→	The few outside are dismissed as cranks by association	✗ không	thảo luận
Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported	→	The few outside are dismissed as cranks by association	✗ không	thảo luận
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	✗ không	thảo luận
Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow	→	The few outside are dismissed as cranks by association	✗ không	thảo luận
Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow	→	Nobody keeps a public record of which official claims were later revised	✗ không	thảo luận
The bodies that issue guidance also fund those who check it	→	Nobody keeps a public record of which official claims were later revised	✗ không	thảo luận
A correction arrives long after the decision it should have changed	→	Once labelled, a claim cannot get a hearing even when the evidence changes	✗ không	thảo luận
The bodies that issue guidance also fund those who check it	→	Requests for data are answered eighteen months later, if at all	✗ không	thảo luận
Requests for data are answered eighteen months later, if at all	→	Once labelled, a claim cannot get a hearing even when the evidence changes	✗ không	thảo luận
Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported	→	Requests for data are answered eighteen months later, if at all	✗ không	thảo luận
Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported	→	Once labelled, a claim cannot get a hearing even when the evidence changes	✗ không	thảo luận
Once labelled, a claim cannot get a hearing even when the evidence changes	→	The bodies that issue guidance also fund those who check it	✗ không	thảo luận
Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow	→	Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported	✗ không	thảo luận
Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported	→	A correction arrives long after the decision it should have changed	✗ không	thảo luận
Once labelled, a claim cannot get a hearing even when the evidence changes	→	A correction arrives long after the decision it should have changed	✗ không	thảo luận
Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow	→	Once labelled, a claim cannot get a hearing even when the evidence changes	✗ không	thảo luận
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	✗ không	thảo luận
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	✗ không	thảo luận
The bodies that issue guidance also fund those who check it	→	Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported	✗ không	thảo luận
Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported	→	The bodies that issue guidance also fund those who check it	✗ không	thảo luận
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	✗ không	thảo luận
The bodies that issue guidance also fund those who check it	→	Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow	✗ không	thảo luận
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	✗ không	thảo luận
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	✗ không	thảo luận
A paper that contradicts the field is reviewed harder than one that confirms it	→	The few outside are dismissed as cranks by association	✗ không	thảo luận
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	✗ không	thảo luận
A correction arrives long after the decision it should have changed	→	Nobody keeps a public record of which official claims were later revised	✗ không	thảo luận
Requests for data are answered eighteen months later, if at all	→	Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported	✗ không	thảo luận
A correction arrives long after the decision it should have changed	→	Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow	✗ không	thảo luận
Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow	→	The bodies that issue guidance also fund those who check it	✗ không	thảo luận
The few outside are dismissed as cranks by association	→	Once labelled, a claim cannot get a hearing even when the evidence changes	✗ không	thảo luận
A correction arrives long after the decision it should have changed	→	Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported	✗ không	thảo luận
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	✗ không	thảo luận
Once labelled, a claim cannot get a hearing even when the evidence changes	→	Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported	✗ không	thảo luận
Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported	→	Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow	✗ không	thảo luận
You cannot check a claim whose data is not released	→	The reply is that release would be misinterpreted by the public	✗ không	thảo luận
So institutions treat all criticism as one category and answer none of it	→	A researcher who audits a funder's work loses the funder	✗ không	thảo luận
Peer review is three unpaid people on a deadline	→	Being unable to reproduce a result is not itself publishable	✗ không	thảo luận
Each revision is announced as if it were the position all along	→	Peer review is three unpaid people on a deadline	✗ không	thảo luận
You cannot check a claim whose data is not released	→	So institutions treat all criticism as one category and answer none of it	✗ không	thảo luận
A researcher who audits a funder's work loses the funder	→	You cannot check a claim whose data is not released	✗ không	thảo luận
So institutions treat all criticism as one category and answer none of it	→	The reply is that release would be misinterpreted by the public	✗ không	thảo luận
You cannot check a claim whose data is not released	→	A researcher who audits a funder's work loses the funder	✗ không	thảo luận
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	✗ không	thảo luận
There is no body whose job is to be wrong-footed early	→	Institutions investigate themselves and find nothing	✗ không	thảo luận
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	✗ không	thảo luận
Being unable to reproduce a result is not itself publishable	→	Peer review is three unpaid people on a deadline	✗ không	thảo luận
Each revision is announced as if it were the position all along	→	You cannot check a claim whose data is not released	✗ không	thảo luận
A genuine critic and a bad-faith one look identical from a distance	→	You cannot check a claim whose data is not released	✗ không	thảo luận
Peer review is three unpaid people on a deadline	→	Each revision is announced as if it were the position all along	✗ không	thảo luận
You cannot check a claim whose data is not released	→	Institutions investigate themselves and find nothing	✗ không	thảo luận
A researcher who audits a funder's work loses the funder	→	Each revision is announced as if it were the position all along	✗ không	thảo luận
A genuine critic and a bad-faith one look identical from a distance	→	A researcher who audits a funder's work loses the funder	✗ không	thảo luận
So institutions treat all criticism as one category and answer none of it	→	Being unable to reproduce a result is not itself publishable	✗ không	thảo luận
Being unable to reproduce a result is not itself publishable	→	Institutions investigate themselves and find nothing	✗ không	thảo luận
A researcher who audits a funder's work loses the funder	→	Peer review is three unpaid people on a deadline	✗ không	thảo luận
A genuine critic and a bad-faith one look identical from a distance	→	Being unable to reproduce a result is not itself publishable	✗ không	thảo luận
Being unable to reproduce a result is not itself publishable	→	Each revision is announced as if it were the position all along	✗ không	thảo luận
Institutions investigate themselves and find nothing	→	Peer review is three unpaid people on a deadline	✗ không	thảo luận
You cannot check a claim whose data is not released	→	There is no body whose job is to be wrong-footed early	✗ không	thảo luận
Being unable to reproduce a result is not itself publishable	→	There is no body whose job is to be wrong-footed early	✗ không	thảo luận
Being unable to reproduce a result is not itself publishable	→	So institutions treat all criticism as one category and answer none of it	✗ không	thảo luận
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	✗ không	thảo luận
Institutions investigate themselves and find nothing	→	You cannot check a claim whose data is not released	✗ không	thảo luận
Institutions investigate themselves and find nothing	→	The reply is that release would be misinterpreted by the public	✗ không	thảo luận
A researcher who audits a funder's work loses the funder	→	There is no body whose job is to be wrong-footed early	✗ không	thảo luận
A researcher who audits a funder's work loses the funder	→	Institutions investigate themselves and find nothing	✗ không	thảo luận
There is no body whose job is to be wrong-footed early	→	Peer review is three unpaid people on a deadline	✗ không	thảo luận
The reply is that release would be misinterpreted by the public	→	Each revision is announced as if it were the position all along	✗ không	thảo luận
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	✗ không	thảo luận
You cannot check a claim whose data is not released	→	Being unable to reproduce a result is not itself publishable	✗ không	thảo luận
A researcher who audits a funder's work loses the funder	→	A genuine critic and a bad-faith one look identical from a distance	✗ không	thảo luận
Peer review is three unpaid people on a deadline	→	Institutions investigate themselves and find nothing	✗ không	thảo luận
There is no body whose job is to be wrong-footed early	→	A researcher who audits a funder's work loses the funder	✗ không	thảo luận
Institutions investigate themselves and find nothing	→	So institutions treat all criticism as one category and answer none of it	✗ không	thảo luận
There is no body whose job is to be wrong-footed early	→	The reply is that release would be misinterpreted by the public	✗ không	thảo luận
There is no body whose job is to be wrong-footed early	→	Being unable to reproduce a result is not itself publishable	✗ không	thảo luận
A genuine critic and a bad-faith one look identical from a distance	→	The reply is that release would be misinterpreted by the public	✗ không	thảo luận
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	✗ không	thảo luận
A genuine critic and a bad-faith one look identical from a distance	→	Peer review is three unpaid people on a deadline	✗ không	thảo luận
The reply is that release would be misinterpreted by the public	→	So institutions treat all criticism as one category and answer none of it	✗ không	thảo luận
So institutions treat all criticism as one category and answer none of it	→	You cannot check a claim whose data is not released	✗ không	thảo luận
Being unable to reproduce a result is not itself publishable	→	You cannot check a claim whose data is not released	✗ không	thảo luận
Institutions investigate themselves and find nothing	→	Each revision is announced as if it were the position all along	✗ không	thảo luận
The reply is that release would be misinterpreted by the public	→	Peer review is three unpaid people on a deadline	✗ không	thảo luận
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	✗ không	thảo luận
The reply is that release would be misinterpreted by the public	→	Being unable to reproduce a result is not itself publishable	✗ không	thảo luận
Peer review is three unpaid people on a deadline	→	You cannot check a claim whose data is not released	✗ không	thảo luận
Peer review is three unpaid people on a deadline	→	There is no body whose job is to be wrong-footed early	✗ không	thảo luận
There is no body whose job is to be wrong-footed early	→	You cannot check a claim whose data is not released	✗ không	thảo luận
A researcher who audits a funder's work loses the funder	→	The reply is that release would be misinterpreted by the public	✗ không	thảo luận
Being unable to reproduce a result is not itself publishable	→	The reply is that release would be misinterpreted by the public	✗ không	thảo luận
Institutions investigate themselves and find nothing	→	Being unable to reproduce a result is not itself publishable	✗ không	thảo luận
Institutions investigate themselves and find nothing	→	A researcher who audits a funder's work loses the funder	✗ không	thảo luận
The reply is that release would be misinterpreted by the public	→	There is no body whose job is to be wrong-footed early	✗ không	thảo luận
There is no body whose job is to be wrong-footed early	→	Each revision is announced as if it were the position all along	✗ không	thảo luận
A researcher who audits a funder's work loses the funder	→	So institutions treat all criticism as one category and answer none of it	✗ không	thảo luận
Being unable to reproduce a result is not itself publishable	→	A researcher who audits a funder's work loses the funder	✗ không	thảo luận
Each revision is announced as if it were the position all along	→	Institutions investigate themselves and find nothing	✗ không	thảo luận
Each revision is announced as if it were the position all along	→	There is no body whose job is to be wrong-footed early	✗ không	thảo luận
A genuine critic and a bad-faith one look identical from a distance	→	Institutions investigate themselves and find nothing	✗ không	thảo luận
So institutions treat all criticism as one category and answer none of it	→	Peer review is three unpaid people on a deadline	✗ không	thảo luận
Being unable to reproduce a result is not itself publishable	→	A genuine critic and a bad-faith one look identical from a distance	✗ không	thảo luận
A researcher who audits a funder's work loses the funder	→	Being unable to reproduce a result is not itself publishable	✗ không	thảo luận
The reply is that release would be misinterpreted by the public	→	A researcher who audits a funder's work loses the funder	✗ không	thảo luận
The reply is that release would be misinterpreted by the public	→	A genuine critic and a bad-faith one look identical from a distance	✗ không	thảo luận
You cannot check a claim whose data is not released	→	A genuine critic and a bad-faith one look identical from a distance	✗ không	thảo luận
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	✗ không	thảo luận
You cannot check a claim whose data is not released	→	Peer review is three unpaid people on a deadline	✗ không	thảo luận
Peer review is three unpaid people on a deadline	→	So institutions treat all criticism as one category and answer none of it	✗ không	thảo luận
So institutions treat all criticism as one category and answer none of it	→	Institutions investigate themselves and find nothing	✗ không	thảo luận
The reply is that release would be misinterpreted by the public	→	You cannot check a claim whose data is not released	✗ không	thảo luận
You cannot check a claim whose data is not released	→	Each revision is announced as if it were the position all along	✗ không	thảo luận