True Causes
IT
← home
7/7 · Azioni · in visione: Struttura
persone: 30 · idee: 35
dimostrazione · non conteggiata
ostacoli · chiunque abbia il link · in elenco pubblico · federazione attiva
condotta da il suo facilitatore (sigillata)
persone: 30 · idee: 35 · 2 gruppi · 3 stanze in federazione
Passaporto → · Logica → · registro
↗ condividi questa mappa
Su un altro sito, come mappa interattiva:
Come immagine: https://truecauses.org/d/e74d06f/map.svg
Come dati: tutte le coppie valutate in questa stanza (CSV). Ogni affermazione ha il suo indirizzo, /c/e74d06f/<card>, elencato sotto la mappa.
Cita la fonte quando pubblichi: Causal map: True Causes, https://truecauses.org/d/e74d06f
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.

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.
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.
risolte: 161 / 162 da rispondere: 0
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.
chiudi ✕
You cannot check a claim whose data is not released → 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 publishableapertadiscuti
Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow→A correction arrives long after the decision it should have changed✓ sìdiscuti
Nobody keeps a public record of which official claims were later revised→Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported✓ sìdiscuti
A correction arrives long after the decision it should have changed→Requests for data are answered eighteen months later, if at all✓ sìdiscuti
The few outside are dismissed as cranks by association→The bodies that issue guidance also fund those who check it✓ sìdiscuti
The bodies that issue guidance also fund those who check it→A correction arrives long after the decision it should have changed✓ sìdiscuti
Once labelled, a claim cannot get a hearing even when the evidence changes→Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow✓ sìdiscuti
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✓ sìdiscuti
Peer review is three unpaid people on a deadline→A researcher who audits a funder's work loses the funder✓ sìdiscuti
Peer review is three unpaid people on a deadline→The reply is that release would be misinterpreted by the public✓ sìdiscuti
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✓ sìdiscuti
Each revision is announced as if it were the position all along→The reply is that release would be misinterpreted by the public✓ sìdiscuti
Institutions investigate themselves and find nothing→A genuine critic and a bad-faith one look identical from a distance✓ sìdiscuti
Each revision is announced as if it were the position all along→A researcher who audits a funder's work loses the funder✓ sìdiscuti
The reply is that release would be misinterpreted by the public→Institutions investigate themselves and find nothing✓ sìdiscuti
Institutions investigate themselves and find nothing→There is no body whose job is to be wrong-footed early✓ sìdiscuti
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 deduzionediscuti
Peer review is three unpaid people on a deadline→A genuine critic and a bad-faith one look identical from a distance✓ per deduzionediscuti
Requests for data are answered eighteen months later, if at all→A correction arrives long after the decision it should have changed✗ nodiscuti
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✗ nodiscuti
Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported→A paper that contradicts the field is reviewed harder than one that confirms it✗ nodiscuti
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✗ nodiscuti
Once labelled, a claim cannot get a hearing even when the evidence changes→Requests for data are answered eighteen months later, if at all✗ nodiscuti
Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported→Nobody keeps a public record of which official claims were later revised✗ nodiscuti
The few outside are dismissed as cranks by association→Nobody keeps a public record of which official claims were later revised✗ nodiscuti
A correction arrives long after the decision it should have changed→The few outside are dismissed as cranks by association✗ nodiscuti
Requests for data are answered eighteen months later, if at all→The bodies that issue guidance also fund those who check it✗ nodiscuti
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✗ nodiscuti
Nobody keeps a public record of which official claims were later revised→The bodies that issue guidance also fund those who check it✗ nodiscuti
Nobody keeps a public record of which official claims were later revised→The few outside are dismissed as cranks by association✗ nodiscuti
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✗ nodiscuti
The few outside are dismissed as cranks by association→Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported✗ nodiscuti
A correction arrives long after the decision it should have changed→The bodies that issue guidance also fund those who check it✗ nodiscuti
Once labelled, a claim cannot get a hearing even when the evidence changes→The few outside are dismissed as cranks by association✗ nodiscuti
Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow→Requests for data are answered eighteen months later, if at all✗ nodiscuti
Nobody keeps a public record of which official claims were later revised→A correction arrives long after the decision it should have changed✗ nodiscuti
The bodies that issue guidance also fund those who check it→Once labelled, a claim cannot get a hearing even when the evidence changes✗ nodiscuti
The few outside are dismissed as cranks by association→A paper that contradicts the field is reviewed harder than one that confirms it✗ nodiscuti
The few outside are dismissed as cranks by association→Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow✗ nodiscuti
Nobody keeps a public record of which official claims were later revised→Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow✗ nodiscuti
The few outside are dismissed as cranks by association→Requests for data are answered eighteen months later, if at all✗ nodiscuti
Nobody keeps a public record of which official claims were later revised→Requests for data are answered eighteen months later, if at all✗ nodiscuti
A paper that contradicts the field is reviewed harder than one that confirms it→Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported✗ nodiscuti
The few outside are dismissed as cranks by association→A correction arrives long after the decision it should have changed✗ nodiscuti
Requests for data are answered eighteen months later, if at all→Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow✗ nodiscuti
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✗ nodiscuti
Requests for data are answered eighteen months later, if at all→Nobody keeps a public record of which official claims were later revised✗ nodiscuti
Requests for data are answered eighteen months later, if at all→The few outside are dismissed as cranks by association✗ nodiscuti
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✗ nodiscuti
The bodies that issue guidance also fund those who check it→The few outside are dismissed as cranks by association✗ nodiscuti
Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported→The few outside are dismissed as cranks by association✗ nodiscuti
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✗ nodiscuti
Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow→The few outside are dismissed as cranks by association✗ nodiscuti
Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow→Nobody keeps a public record of which official claims were later revised✗ nodiscuti
The bodies that issue guidance also fund those who check it→Nobody keeps a public record of which official claims were later revised✗ nodiscuti
A correction arrives long after the decision it should have changed→Once labelled, a claim cannot get a hearing even when the evidence changes✗ nodiscuti
The bodies that issue guidance also fund those who check it→Requests for data are answered eighteen months later, if at all✗ nodiscuti
Requests for data are answered eighteen months later, if at all→Once labelled, a claim cannot get a hearing even when the evidence changes✗ nodiscuti
Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported→Requests for data are answered eighteen months later, if at all✗ nodiscuti
Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported→Once labelled, a claim cannot get a hearing even when the evidence changes✗ nodiscuti
Once labelled, a claim cannot get a hearing even when the evidence changes→The bodies that issue guidance also fund those who check it✗ nodiscuti
Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow→Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported✗ nodiscuti
Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported→A correction arrives long after the decision it should have changed✗ nodiscuti
Once labelled, a claim cannot get a hearing even when the evidence changes→A correction arrives long after the decision it should have changed✗ nodiscuti
Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow→Once labelled, a claim cannot get a hearing even when the evidence changes✗ nodiscuti
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✗ nodiscuti
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✗ nodiscuti
The bodies that issue guidance also fund those who check it→Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported✗ nodiscuti
Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported→The bodies that issue guidance also fund those who check it✗ nodiscuti
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✗ nodiscuti
The bodies that issue guidance also fund those who check it→Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow✗ nodiscuti
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✗ nodiscuti
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✗ nodiscuti
A paper that contradicts the field is reviewed harder than one that confirms it→The few outside are dismissed as cranks by association✗ nodiscuti
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✗ nodiscuti
A correction arrives long after the decision it should have changed→Nobody keeps a public record of which official claims were later revised✗ nodiscuti
Requests for data are answered eighteen months later, if at all→Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported✗ nodiscuti
A correction arrives long after the decision it should have changed→Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow✗ nodiscuti
Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow→The bodies that issue guidance also fund those who check it✗ nodiscuti
The few outside are dismissed as cranks by association→Once labelled, a claim cannot get a hearing even when the evidence changes✗ nodiscuti
A correction arrives long after the decision it should have changed→Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported✗ nodiscuti
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✗ nodiscuti
Once labelled, a claim cannot get a hearing even when the evidence changes→Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported✗ nodiscuti
Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supported→Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow✗ nodiscuti
You cannot check a claim whose data is not released→The reply is that release would be misinterpreted by the public✗ nodiscuti
So institutions treat all criticism as one category and answer none of it→A researcher who audits a funder's work loses the funder✗ nodiscuti
Peer review is three unpaid people on a deadline→Being unable to reproduce a result is not itself publishable✗ nodiscuti
Each revision is announced as if it were the position all along→Peer review is three unpaid people on a deadline✗ nodiscuti
You cannot check a claim whose data is not released→So institutions treat all criticism as one category and answer none of it✗ nodiscuti
A researcher who audits a funder's work loses the funder→You cannot check a claim whose data is not released✗ nodiscuti
So institutions treat all criticism as one category and answer none of it→The reply is that release would be misinterpreted by the public✗ nodiscuti
You cannot check a claim whose data is not released→A researcher who audits a funder's work loses the funder✗ nodiscuti
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✗ nodiscuti
There is no body whose job is to be wrong-footed early→Institutions investigate themselves and find nothing✗ nodiscuti
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✗ nodiscuti
Being unable to reproduce a result is not itself publishable→Peer review is three unpaid people on a deadline✗ nodiscuti
Each revision is announced as if it were the position all along→You cannot check a claim whose data is not released✗ nodiscuti
A genuine critic and a bad-faith one look identical from a distance→You cannot check a claim whose data is not released✗ nodiscuti
Peer review is three unpaid people on a deadline→Each revision is announced as if it were the position all along✗ nodiscuti
You cannot check a claim whose data is not released→Institutions investigate themselves and find nothing✗ nodiscuti
A researcher who audits a funder's work loses the funder→Each revision is announced as if it were the position all along✗ nodiscuti
A genuine critic and a bad-faith one look identical from a distance→A researcher who audits a funder's work loses the funder✗ nodiscuti
So institutions treat all criticism as one category and answer none of it→Being unable to reproduce a result is not itself publishable✗ nodiscuti
Being unable to reproduce a result is not itself publishable→Institutions investigate themselves and find nothing✗ nodiscuti
A researcher who audits a funder's work loses the funder→Peer review is three unpaid people on a deadline✗ nodiscuti
A genuine critic and a bad-faith one look identical from a distance→Being unable to reproduce a result is not itself publishable✗ nodiscuti
Being unable to reproduce a result is not itself publishable→Each revision is announced as if it were the position all along✗ nodiscuti
Institutions investigate themselves and find nothing→Peer review is three unpaid people on a deadline✗ nodiscuti
You cannot check a claim whose data is not released→There is no body whose job is to be wrong-footed early✗ nodiscuti
Being unable to reproduce a result is not itself publishable→There is no body whose job is to be wrong-footed early✗ nodiscuti
Being unable to reproduce a result is not itself publishable→So institutions treat all criticism as one category and answer none of it✗ nodiscuti
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✗ nodiscuti
Institutions investigate themselves and find nothing→You cannot check a claim whose data is not released✗ nodiscuti
Institutions investigate themselves and find nothing→The reply is that release would be misinterpreted by the public✗ nodiscuti
A researcher who audits a funder's work loses the funder→There is no body whose job is to be wrong-footed early✗ nodiscuti
A researcher who audits a funder's work loses the funder→Institutions investigate themselves and find nothing✗ nodiscuti
There is no body whose job is to be wrong-footed early→Peer review is three unpaid people on a deadline✗ nodiscuti
The reply is that release would be misinterpreted by the public→Each revision is announced as if it were the position all along✗ nodiscuti
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✗ nodiscuti
You cannot check a claim whose data is not released→Being unable to reproduce a result is not itself publishable✗ nodiscuti
A researcher who audits a funder's work loses the funder→A genuine critic and a bad-faith one look identical from a distance✗ nodiscuti
Peer review is three unpaid people on a deadline→Institutions investigate themselves and find nothing✗ nodiscuti
There is no body whose job is to be wrong-footed early→A researcher who audits a funder's work loses the funder✗ nodiscuti
Institutions investigate themselves and find nothing→So institutions treat all criticism as one category and answer none of it✗ nodiscuti
There is no body whose job is to be wrong-footed early→The reply is that release would be misinterpreted by the public✗ nodiscuti
There is no body whose job is to be wrong-footed early→Being unable to reproduce a result is not itself publishable✗ nodiscuti
A genuine critic and a bad-faith one look identical from a distance→The reply is that release would be misinterpreted by the public✗ nodiscuti
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✗ nodiscuti
A genuine critic and a bad-faith one look identical from a distance→Peer review is three unpaid people on a deadline✗ nodiscuti
The reply is that release would be misinterpreted by the public→So institutions treat all criticism as one category and answer none of it✗ nodiscuti
So institutions treat all criticism as one category and answer none of it→You cannot check a claim whose data is not released✗ nodiscuti
Being unable to reproduce a result is not itself publishable→You cannot check a claim whose data is not released✗ nodiscuti
Institutions investigate themselves and find nothing→Each revision is announced as if it were the position all along✗ nodiscuti
The reply is that release would be misinterpreted by the public→Peer review is three unpaid people on a deadline✗ nodiscuti
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✗ nodiscuti
The reply is that release would be misinterpreted by the public→Being unable to reproduce a result is not itself publishable✗ nodiscuti
Peer review is three unpaid people on a deadline→You cannot check a claim whose data is not released✗ nodiscuti
Peer review is three unpaid people on a deadline→There is no body whose job is to be wrong-footed early✗ nodiscuti
There is no body whose job is to be wrong-footed early→You cannot check a claim whose data is not released✗ nodiscuti
A researcher who audits a funder's work loses the funder→The reply is that release would be misinterpreted by the public✗ nodiscuti
Being unable to reproduce a result is not itself publishable→The reply is that release would be misinterpreted by the public✗ nodiscuti
Institutions investigate themselves and find nothing→Being unable to reproduce a result is not itself publishable✗ nodiscuti
Institutions investigate themselves and find nothing→A researcher who audits a funder's work loses the funder✗ nodiscuti
The reply is that release would be misinterpreted by the public→There is no body whose job is to be wrong-footed early✗ nodiscuti
There is no body whose job is to be wrong-footed early→Each revision is announced as if it were the position all along✗ nodiscuti
A researcher who audits a funder's work loses the funder→So institutions treat all criticism as one category and answer none of it✗ nodiscuti
Being unable to reproduce a result is not itself publishable→A researcher who audits a funder's work loses the funder✗ nodiscuti
Each revision is announced as if it were the position all along→Institutions investigate themselves and find nothing✗ nodiscuti
Each revision is announced as if it were the position all along→There is no body whose job is to be wrong-footed early✗ nodiscuti
A genuine critic and a bad-faith one look identical from a distance→Institutions investigate themselves and find nothing✗ nodiscuti
So institutions treat all criticism as one category and answer none of it→Peer review is three unpaid people on a deadline✗ nodiscuti
Being unable to reproduce a result is not itself publishable→A genuine critic and a bad-faith one look identical from a distance✗ nodiscuti
A researcher who audits a funder's work loses the funder→Being unable to reproduce a result is not itself publishable✗ nodiscuti
The reply is that release would be misinterpreted by the public→A researcher who audits a funder's work loses the funder✗ nodiscuti
The reply is that release would be misinterpreted by the public→A genuine critic and a bad-faith one look identical from a distance✗ nodiscuti
You cannot check a claim whose data is not released→A genuine critic and a bad-faith one look identical from a distance✗ nodiscuti
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✗ nodiscuti
You cannot check a claim whose data is not released→Peer review is three unpaid people on a deadline✗ nodiscuti
Peer review is three unpaid people on a deadline→So institutions treat all criticism as one category and answer none of it✗ nodiscuti
So institutions treat all criticism as one category and answer none of it→Institutions investigate themselves and find nothing✗ nodiscuti
The reply is that release would be misinterpreted by the public→You cannot check a claim whose data is not released✗ nodiscuti
You cannot check a claim whose data is not released→Each revision is announced as if it were the position all along✗ noin primo piano ↑ · chiudi ✕