LA QUESTION
Why does a lie travel further than the truth?
L’une influence-t-elle fortement l’autre ? Les trois quarts des votes exprimés décident.
fermé · retour à la phase Actions
Mode invité. Choisissez un pseudo pour rejoindre la salle et participer.
Les questions sont réparties entre les groupes : vous recevez celles attribuées à votre groupe — pas toutes les 162.
tranchées : 161 / 162 à vous de répondre : 0 pourquoi
Personne ne pourrait répondre à plusieurs centaines de paires. Chaque paire va à un groupe ; une paire sur laquelle le groupe se divise est ensuite renvoyée à d’autres groupes, et peut donc apparaître plus tard dans votre liste même si elle a commencé ailleurs. Le nombre de paires tranchées inclut le travail de tous les groupes : c’est pourquoi il monte plus vite que votre propre liste ne diminue.
Dernier décompte : tranchées : 161 · transmises à des panels inter-groupes : 0 · contestées : 0 · sous le quorum : 1 — les panels ont besoin d’au moins max(2, 75 % du panel) votes exprimés ; votre plus petit panel compte 15 membres.
The bodies that issue guidance also fund those who check it → influence ? → Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow
Rien n’a encore été dit.
Phase terminée — l’archive des paires et des votes figure ci-dessus.Vérifier la logique ↗
| Each revision is announced as if it were the position all along | → | Being unable to reproduce a result is not itself publishable | ouvert | discuter |
| Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow | → | A correction arrives long after the decision it should have changed | ✓ oui | discuter |
| Nobody keeps a public record of which official claims were later revised | → | Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported | ✓ oui | discuter |
| A correction arrives long after the decision it should have changed | → | Requests for data are answered eighteen months later, if at all | ✓ oui | discuter |
| The few outside are dismissed as cranks by association | → | The bodies that issue guidance also fund those who check it | ✓ oui | discuter |
| The bodies that issue guidance also fund those who check it | → | A correction arrives long after the decision it should have changed | ✓ oui | discuter |
| Once labelled, a claim cannot get a hearing even when the evidence changes | → | Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow | ✓ oui | discuter |
| 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 | ✓ oui | discuter |
| Peer review is three unpaid people on a deadline | → | A researcher who audits a funder's work loses the funder | ✓ oui | discuter |
| Peer review is three unpaid people on a deadline | → | The reply is that release would be misinterpreted by the public | ✓ oui | discuter |
| 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 | ✓ oui | discuter |
| Each revision is announced as if it were the position all along | → | The reply is that release would be misinterpreted by the public | ✓ oui | discuter |
| Institutions investigate themselves and find nothing | → | A genuine critic and a bad-faith one look identical from a distance | ✓ oui | discuter |
| Each revision is announced as if it were the position all along | → | A researcher who audits a funder's work loses the funder | ✓ oui | discuter |
| The reply is that release would be misinterpreted by the public | → | Institutions investigate themselves and find nothing | ✓ oui | discuter |
| Institutions investigate themselves and find nothing | → | There is no body whose job is to be wrong-footed early | ✓ oui | discuter |
| 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 | ✓ déduit | discuter |
| Peer review is three unpaid people on a deadline | → | A genuine critic and a bad-faith one look identical from a distance | ✓ déduit | discuter |
| Requests for data are answered eighteen months later, if at all | → | A correction arrives long after the decision it should have changed | ✗ non | discuter |
| 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 | ✗ non | discuter |
| Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported | → | A paper that contradicts the field is reviewed harder than one that confirms it | ✗ non | discuter |
| 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 | ✗ non | discuter |
| Once labelled, a claim cannot get a hearing even when the evidence changes | → | Requests for data are answered eighteen months later, if at all | ✗ non | discuter |
| Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported | → | Nobody keeps a public record of which official claims were later revised | ✗ non | discuter |
| The few outside are dismissed as cranks by association | → | Nobody keeps a public record of which official claims were later revised | ✗ non | discuter |
| A correction arrives long after the decision it should have changed | → | The few outside are dismissed as cranks by association | ✗ non | discuter |
| Requests for data are answered eighteen months later, if at all | → | The bodies that issue guidance also fund those who check it | ✗ non | discuter |
| 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 | ✗ non | discuter |
| Nobody keeps a public record of which official claims were later revised | → | The bodies that issue guidance also fund those who check it | ✗ non | discuter |
| Nobody keeps a public record of which official claims were later revised | → | The few outside are dismissed as cranks by association | ✗ non | discuter |
| 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 | ✗ non | discuter |
| The few outside are dismissed as cranks by association | → | Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported | ✗ non | discuter |
| A correction arrives long after the decision it should have changed | → | The bodies that issue guidance also fund those who check it | ✗ non | discuter |
| Once labelled, a claim cannot get a hearing even when the evidence changes | → | The few outside are dismissed as cranks by association | ✗ non | discuter |
| Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow | → | Requests for data are answered eighteen months later, if at all | ✗ non | discuter |
| Nobody keeps a public record of which official claims were later revised | → | A correction arrives long after the decision it should have changed | ✗ non | discuter |
| The bodies that issue guidance also fund those who check it | → | Once labelled, a claim cannot get a hearing even when the evidence changes | ✗ non | discuter |
| The few outside are dismissed as cranks by association | → | A paper that contradicts the field is reviewed harder than one that confirms it | ✗ non | discuter |
| The few outside are dismissed as cranks by association | → | Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow | ✗ non | discuter |
| Nobody keeps a public record of which official claims were later revised | → | Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow | ✗ non | discuter |
| The few outside are dismissed as cranks by association | → | Requests for data are answered eighteen months later, if at all | ✗ non | discuter |
| Nobody keeps a public record of which official claims were later revised | → | Requests for data are answered eighteen months later, if at all | ✗ non | discuter |
| A paper that contradicts the field is reviewed harder than one that confirms it | → | Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported | ✗ non | discuter |
| The few outside are dismissed as cranks by association | → | A correction arrives long after the decision it should have changed | ✗ non | discuter |
| Requests for data are answered eighteen months later, if at all | → | Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow | ✗ non | discuter |
| 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 | ✗ non | discuter |
| Requests for data are answered eighteen months later, if at all | → | Nobody keeps a public record of which official claims were later revised | ✗ non | discuter |
| Requests for data are answered eighteen months later, if at all | → | The few outside are dismissed as cranks by association | ✗ non | discuter |
| 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 | ✗ non | discuter |
| The bodies that issue guidance also fund those who check it | → | The few outside are dismissed as cranks by association | ✗ non | discuter |
| Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported | → | The few outside are dismissed as cranks by association | ✗ non | discuter |
| 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 | ✗ non | discuter |
| Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow | → | The few outside are dismissed as cranks by association | ✗ non | discuter |
| Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow | → | Nobody keeps a public record of which official claims were later revised | ✗ non | discuter |
| The bodies that issue guidance also fund those who check it | → | Nobody keeps a public record of which official claims were later revised | ✗ non | discuter |
| A correction arrives long after the decision it should have changed | → | Once labelled, a claim cannot get a hearing even when the evidence changes | ✗ non | discuter |
| The bodies that issue guidance also fund those who check it | → | Requests for data are answered eighteen months later, if at all | ✗ non | discuter |
| Requests for data are answered eighteen months later, if at all | → | Once labelled, a claim cannot get a hearing even when the evidence changes | ✗ non | discuter |
| Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported | → | Requests for data are answered eighteen months later, if at all | ✗ non | discuter |
| Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported | → | Once labelled, a claim cannot get a hearing even when the evidence changes | ✗ non | discuter |
| Once labelled, a claim cannot get a hearing even when the evidence changes | → | The bodies that issue guidance also fund those who check it | ✗ non | discuter |
| Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow | → | Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported | ✗ non | discuter |
| Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported | → | A correction arrives long after the decision it should have changed | ✗ non | discuter |
| Once labelled, a claim cannot get a hearing even when the evidence changes | → | A correction arrives long after the decision it should have changed | ✗ non | discuter |
| Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow | → | Once labelled, a claim cannot get a hearing even when the evidence changes | ✗ non | discuter |
| 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 | ✗ non | discuter |
| 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 | ✗ non | discuter |
| The bodies that issue guidance also fund those who check it | → | Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported | ✗ non | discuter |
| Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported | → | The bodies that issue guidance also fund those who check it | ✗ non | discuter |
| 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 | ✗ non | discuter |
| The bodies that issue guidance also fund those who check it | → | Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow | ✗ non | au premier plan ↑ · fermer ✕ |
| 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 | ✗ non | discuter |
| 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 | ✗ non | discuter |
| A paper that contradicts the field is reviewed harder than one that confirms it | → | The few outside are dismissed as cranks by association | ✗ non | discuter |
| 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 | ✗ non | discuter |
| A correction arrives long after the decision it should have changed | → | Nobody keeps a public record of which official claims were later revised | ✗ non | discuter |
| Requests for data are answered eighteen months later, if at all | → | Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported | ✗ non | discuter |
| A correction arrives long after the decision it should have changed | → | Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow | ✗ non | discuter |
| Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow | → | The bodies that issue guidance also fund those who check it | ✗ non | discuter |
| The few outside are dismissed as cranks by association | → | Once labelled, a claim cannot get a hearing even when the evidence changes | ✗ non | discuter |
| A correction arrives long after the decision it should have changed | → | Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported | ✗ non | discuter |
| 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 | ✗ non | discuter |
| Once labelled, a claim cannot get a hearing even when the evidence changes | → | Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported | ✗ non | discuter |
| Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported | → | Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow | ✗ non | discuter |
| You cannot check a claim whose data is not released | → | The reply is that release would be misinterpreted by the public | ✗ non | discuter |
| So institutions treat all criticism as one category and answer none of it | → | A researcher who audits a funder's work loses the funder | ✗ non | discuter |
| Peer review is three unpaid people on a deadline | → | Being unable to reproduce a result is not itself publishable | ✗ non | discuter |
| Each revision is announced as if it were the position all along | → | Peer review is three unpaid people on a deadline | ✗ non | discuter |
| You cannot check a claim whose data is not released | → | So institutions treat all criticism as one category and answer none of it | ✗ non | discuter |
| A researcher who audits a funder's work loses the funder | → | You cannot check a claim whose data is not released | ✗ non | discuter |
| So institutions treat all criticism as one category and answer none of it | → | The reply is that release would be misinterpreted by the public | ✗ non | discuter |
| You cannot check a claim whose data is not released | → | A researcher who audits a funder's work loses the funder | ✗ non | discuter |
| 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 | ✗ non | discuter |
| There is no body whose job is to be wrong-footed early | → | Institutions investigate themselves and find nothing | ✗ non | discuter |
| 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 | ✗ non | discuter |
| Being unable to reproduce a result is not itself publishable | → | Peer review is three unpaid people on a deadline | ✗ non | discuter |
| Each revision is announced as if it were the position all along | → | You cannot check a claim whose data is not released | ✗ non | discuter |
| A genuine critic and a bad-faith one look identical from a distance | → | You cannot check a claim whose data is not released | ✗ non | discuter |
| Peer review is three unpaid people on a deadline | → | Each revision is announced as if it were the position all along | ✗ non | discuter |
| You cannot check a claim whose data is not released | → | Institutions investigate themselves and find nothing | ✗ non | discuter |
| A researcher who audits a funder's work loses the funder | → | Each revision is announced as if it were the position all along | ✗ non | discuter |
| A genuine critic and a bad-faith one look identical from a distance | → | A researcher who audits a funder's work loses the funder | ✗ non | discuter |
| So institutions treat all criticism as one category and answer none of it | → | Being unable to reproduce a result is not itself publishable | ✗ non | discuter |
| Being unable to reproduce a result is not itself publishable | → | Institutions investigate themselves and find nothing | ✗ non | discuter |
| A researcher who audits a funder's work loses the funder | → | Peer review is three unpaid people on a deadline | ✗ non | discuter |
| A genuine critic and a bad-faith one look identical from a distance | → | Being unable to reproduce a result is not itself publishable | ✗ non | discuter |
| Being unable to reproduce a result is not itself publishable | → | Each revision is announced as if it were the position all along | ✗ non | discuter |
| Institutions investigate themselves and find nothing | → | Peer review is three unpaid people on a deadline | ✗ non | discuter |
| You cannot check a claim whose data is not released | → | There is no body whose job is to be wrong-footed early | ✗ non | discuter |
| Being unable to reproduce a result is not itself publishable | → | There is no body whose job is to be wrong-footed early | ✗ non | discuter |
| Being unable to reproduce a result is not itself publishable | → | So institutions treat all criticism as one category and answer none of it | ✗ non | discuter |
| 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 | ✗ non | discuter |
| Institutions investigate themselves and find nothing | → | You cannot check a claim whose data is not released | ✗ non | discuter |
| Institutions investigate themselves and find nothing | → | The reply is that release would be misinterpreted by the public | ✗ non | discuter |
| A researcher who audits a funder's work loses the funder | → | There is no body whose job is to be wrong-footed early | ✗ non | discuter |
| A researcher who audits a funder's work loses the funder | → | Institutions investigate themselves and find nothing | ✗ non | discuter |
| There is no body whose job is to be wrong-footed early | → | Peer review is three unpaid people on a deadline | ✗ non | discuter |
| The reply is that release would be misinterpreted by the public | → | Each revision is announced as if it were the position all along | ✗ non | discuter |
| 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 | ✗ non | discuter |
| You cannot check a claim whose data is not released | → | Being unable to reproduce a result is not itself publishable | ✗ non | discuter |
| A researcher who audits a funder's work loses the funder | → | A genuine critic and a bad-faith one look identical from a distance | ✗ non | discuter |
| Peer review is three unpaid people on a deadline | → | Institutions investigate themselves and find nothing | ✗ non | discuter |
| There is no body whose job is to be wrong-footed early | → | A researcher who audits a funder's work loses the funder | ✗ non | discuter |
| Institutions investigate themselves and find nothing | → | So institutions treat all criticism as one category and answer none of it | ✗ non | discuter |
| There is no body whose job is to be wrong-footed early | → | The reply is that release would be misinterpreted by the public | ✗ non | discuter |
| There is no body whose job is to be wrong-footed early | → | Being unable to reproduce a result is not itself publishable | ✗ non | discuter |
| A genuine critic and a bad-faith one look identical from a distance | → | The reply is that release would be misinterpreted by the public | ✗ non | discuter |
| 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 | ✗ non | discuter |
| A genuine critic and a bad-faith one look identical from a distance | → | Peer review is three unpaid people on a deadline | ✗ non | discuter |
| The reply is that release would be misinterpreted by the public | → | So institutions treat all criticism as one category and answer none of it | ✗ non | discuter |
| So institutions treat all criticism as one category and answer none of it | → | You cannot check a claim whose data is not released | ✗ non | discuter |
| Being unable to reproduce a result is not itself publishable | → | You cannot check a claim whose data is not released | ✗ non | discuter |
| Institutions investigate themselves and find nothing | → | Each revision is announced as if it were the position all along | ✗ non | discuter |
| The reply is that release would be misinterpreted by the public | → | Peer review is three unpaid people on a deadline | ✗ non | discuter |
| 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 | ✗ non | discuter |
| The reply is that release would be misinterpreted by the public | → | Being unable to reproduce a result is not itself publishable | ✗ non | discuter |
| Peer review is three unpaid people on a deadline | → | You cannot check a claim whose data is not released | ✗ non | discuter |
| Peer review is three unpaid people on a deadline | → | There is no body whose job is to be wrong-footed early | ✗ non | discuter |
| There is no body whose job is to be wrong-footed early | → | You cannot check a claim whose data is not released | ✗ non | discuter |
| A researcher who audits a funder's work loses the funder | → | The reply is that release would be misinterpreted by the public | ✗ non | discuter |
| Being unable to reproduce a result is not itself publishable | → | The reply is that release would be misinterpreted by the public | ✗ non | discuter |
| Institutions investigate themselves and find nothing | → | Being unable to reproduce a result is not itself publishable | ✗ non | discuter |
| Institutions investigate themselves and find nothing | → | A researcher who audits a funder's work loses the funder | ✗ non | discuter |
| The reply is that release would be misinterpreted by the public | → | There is no body whose job is to be wrong-footed early | ✗ non | discuter |
| There is no body whose job is to be wrong-footed early | → | Each revision is announced as if it were the position all along | ✗ non | discuter |
| A researcher who audits a funder's work loses the funder | → | So institutions treat all criticism as one category and answer none of it | ✗ non | discuter |
| Being unable to reproduce a result is not itself publishable | → | A researcher who audits a funder's work loses the funder | ✗ non | discuter |
| Each revision is announced as if it were the position all along | → | Institutions investigate themselves and find nothing | ✗ non | discuter |
| Each revision is announced as if it were the position all along | → | There is no body whose job is to be wrong-footed early | ✗ non | discuter |
| A genuine critic and a bad-faith one look identical from a distance | → | Institutions investigate themselves and find nothing | ✗ non | discuter |
| So institutions treat all criticism as one category and answer none of it | → | Peer review is three unpaid people on a deadline | ✗ non | discuter |
| Being unable to reproduce a result is not itself publishable | → | A genuine critic and a bad-faith one look identical from a distance | ✗ non | discuter |
| A researcher who audits a funder's work loses the funder | → | Being unable to reproduce a result is not itself publishable | ✗ non | discuter |
| The reply is that release would be misinterpreted by the public | → | A researcher who audits a funder's work loses the funder | ✗ non | discuter |
| The reply is that release would be misinterpreted by the public | → | A genuine critic and a bad-faith one look identical from a distance | ✗ non | discuter |
| You cannot check a claim whose data is not released | → | A genuine critic and a bad-faith one look identical from a distance | ✗ non | discuter |
| 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 | ✗ non | discuter |
| You cannot check a claim whose data is not released | → | Peer review is three unpaid people on a deadline | ✗ non | discuter |
| Peer review is three unpaid people on a deadline | → | So institutions treat all criticism as one category and answer none of it | ✗ non | discuter |
| So institutions treat all criticism as one category and answer none of it | → | Institutions investigate themselves and find nothing | ✗ non | discuter |
| The reply is that release would be misinterpreted by the public | → | You cannot check a claim whose data is not released | ✗ non | discuter |
| You cannot check a claim whose data is not released | → | Each revision is announced as if it were the position all along | ✗ non | discuter |