The naturalistic fallacy occurs when a person reads a report of scientific research and concludes that the moral implication of the research was included in the article when, in fact, it was not. For example, the fallacy is committed when a study contains the conclusion that TV advertising increases preference for sugar-based foods, but the reader later believes that the study concluded that TV advertising should be controlled. Previous research indicates that the commission of the fallacy was strong when memory for social research was tested. The present study showed that the commission of the fallacy was stronger when the research which was read involved children as subjects compared to adult subjects. Increased empathy for the subjects of a research article strengthens commission of the fallacy.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
|---|---|
| http://dx.doi.org/10.2466/pr0.1989.65.2.475 | DOI Listing |
Publication Analysis
Top Keywords
Similar Publications
The 'five star' fallacy: an analysis of online reviews and testimonials of dental practices in Northern England.
Br Dent J
September 2022
Speciality Registrar, Dental Public Health, Public Health England, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.
Aims and objectives To develop a greater understanding of how dental practices in the UK utilise and promote patient reviews and testimonials. To compare and contrast the star ratings, levels of engagement and levels of identifiability by comparing those placed by patients on social media, review websites and search engines, to those placed on providers' own websites. To provide recommendations for future advertising guidance.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFIn this article, I defend a discomfiting thesis: The clinical ethicist should sometimes be an active participant in the deception of patients and families. The case for this conclusion builds off Sissela Bok's seminal analysis of lying, from which I emphasize that, despite some common intuitions to the contrary, there is prima facie no morally relevant difference between lies of omission and commission. I then discuss deception's prevalence in medical encounters, noting that the ethicist is often embedded in corresponding decisions, and explicate the realities that underlie these tough cases.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFThe Role of Cognitive Bias in Breast Radiology Diagnostic and Judgment Errors.
J Breast Imaging
August 2020
Banner MD Anderson Cancer Center, Gilbert, AZ.
Cognitive bias is an unavoidable aspect of human decision-making. In breast radiology, these biases contribute to missed or erroneous diagnoses and mistaken judgments. This article introduces breast radiologists to eight cognitive biases commonly encountered in breast radiology: anchoring, availability, commission, confirmation, gambler's fallacy, omission, satisfaction of search, and outcome.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFOf Fallacies and Errors, New and Repeated: A Rejoinder to Butcher et al. (2018).
J Pers Assess
July 2019
a Department of Psychology , Kent State University.
Butcher, Hass, Greene, Nelson, Nichols, and Williams ( 2018 ) responded to my (Ben-Porath, 2018 ) critique of Butcher, Hass, Greene, and Nelson's (2015) analysis of Ted Kaczynski's MMPI-2-RF, purporting to find logical fallacies in my arguments and shortcomings in my interpretation of MMPI-2-RF scales. Butcher et al. ( 2018 ) repeated several previously refuted arguments and opinions, while failing to acknowledge, let alone consider, prior responses to their claims.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFWant AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!