Controversial Claim Research Articles

Narrative misinformation from a credible source can be discredited with counternarrative

Former government intelligence officer David Grusch became a hot new topic in the UFO world when he declared that the government was hiding an alien ship crash retrieval program. Can this media coverage be influential in increasing belief in UFOs? And can a credible critic of Grusch's claims successfully negate the impact of the media coverage on the acceptance of misinformation? A three-condition experiment (N\,=\,287) showed that a counternarrative can successfully negate the influence of his claims on conspiratorial beliefs. We suggest that these results have practical implications for journalists in their coverage of controversial claims.

It’s Not the Slope that Matters: Well-Being and Shapes of Lives

Abstract Many believe that an upward-sloping life is better than a downward-sloping life because of its shape. This is a common way of formulating the shape of a life hypothesis. We argue that the hypothesis is mistaken. We need not assume that there is something intrinsically valuable in the shape of one’s life to justify the tendency to judge an upward-sloping life as better than a downward sloping one. Instead, we can appeal to more fundamental and less controversial claims to justify such a judgment. What one might justifiably judge to be better are features of lives which are often (though not necessarily) correlated with, rather than constituted by, an upward slope.

A Democracy-Friendly Theory of the Rule of Law

The dominant way of thinking about the rule of law is that it is a constraint, a limit, on government. On this view the limitation applies with full force to all forms of government, democratic and undemocratic, and to both the executive and the legislative branches. The privileged institution for enforcing those limits is the courts. Democracy and the rule of law are, in effect, portrayed as though they were in opposition to one another. That, I claim, is a mistake (a) historically (for, in the Anglo-American tradition, the rule of law developed first as a restriction on an undemocratic executive, with a less undemocratic Parliament acting in concert with the courts to institute the rule of law); (b) in principle (for there is a strong argument that democracy needs the rule of law for its fullest expression, and the rule of law needs democracy); and (c) strategically (because it hinders us from mobilizing our full resources to protect both principles; this paper began its life as a response to populist movements, many of which, wrongly, are conceded to be democratic). In this paper I make that case, especially focusing upon its most controversial claim, namely that the rule of law needs democracy. This paper forms part of a larger project on democratic constitutionalism in which I reconsider key concepts in constitutionalism in a manner that takes democratic decision-making to be fundamental to contemporary constitutionalism.

Algorithm evaluation without autonomy

AbstractIn Algorithms & Autonomy, Rubel, Castro, and Pham (hereafter RCP), argue that the concept of autonomy is especially central to understanding important moral problems about algorithms. In particular, autonomy plays a role in analyzing the version of social contract theory that they endorse. I argue that although RCP are largely correct in their diagnosis of what is wrong with the algorithms they consider, those diagnoses can be appropriated by moral theories RCP see as in competition with their autonomy based theory. Most notably, proponents of consequentialism and virtue ethics can appropriate RCPs insights. This is good news because RCP’s social contract theory is vulnerable to a well known class of counterexamples. The most significant contribution of RCP, if I am right, is in their identification, presentation, and evaluation of concrete cases involving algorithms and not in the more controversial claims about theoretical ethics that RCP themselves see as central to what they are doing.

Spectres of Mises: controversial methodological claims reassessed

ABSTRACT In this article, we reassess two of Mises’ core methodological claims. The first claim is that action is necessarily rational. The second claim is that all human minds share a logical structure. Neither claim can be unreservedly accepted but, we argue, both contain truth: Mises’ reflections remain important contributions to our understanding of action and the mind, hence to economics.

Caricature, recognition, misrepresentation

AbstractCaricature undeniably excels at mocking people and their foibles. But is this mode of depiction limited to human beings? Can animals, objects, or even abstract concepts be caricatured? The first goal of this paper is to trace the limits of the caricaturable and see how far they extend beyond the human figure. The second goal is to understand how the wondrous modification enacted by caricature works. To do so, I analyze the features that caricature selects, and argue that such features have a relational nature—they are instantiated by the depicted subject but their sense hinges on implicit norms. I then outline the deep structure of reference exploited by caricature for depicting. Finally, I use this account to unravel the paradox of caricature: how can a picture both misrepresent its subject and prompt an accurate recognition? I defend the controversial claim that caricature per se does not amount to misrepresentation.

Taboos and Self-Censorship Among U.S. Psychology Professors.

We identify points of conflict and consensus regarding (a) controversial empirical claims and (b) normative preferences for how controversial scholarship-and scholars-should be treated. In 2021, we conducted qualitative interviews (n = 41) to generate a quantitative survey (N = 470) of U.S. psychology professors' beliefs and values. Professors strongly disagreed on the truth status of 10 candidate taboo conclusions: For each conclusion, some professors reported 100% certainty in its veracity and others 100% certainty in its falsehood. Professors more confident in the truth of the taboo conclusions reported more self-censorship, a pattern that could bias perceived scientific consensus regarding the inaccuracy of controversial conclusions. Almost all professors worried about social sanctions if they were to express their own empirical beliefs. Tenured professors reported as much self-censorship and as much fear of consequences as untenured professors, including fear of getting fired. Most professors opposed suppressing scholarship and punishing peers on the basis of moral concerns about research conclusions and reported contempt for peers who petition to retract papers on moral grounds. Younger, more left-leaning, and female faculty were generally more opposed to controversial scholarship. These results do not resolve empirical or normative disagreements among psychology professors, but they may provide an empirical context for their discussion.

On the Priority of the Aristotelian Polis over the Individual The Polis as a Hylomorphic Whole

In Politics I 2 (1253a18–27), Aristotle makes a controversial claim that the polis is prior in nature to the individual. The aim of this article is to reconstruct this thesis. According to recent scholarship, there are two main ways to understand priority in nature in Aristotle. It may be construed as ‘existential priority, or as ‘priority in being’. It is argued that: (a) The first option is problematic; it cannot give us a viable reading of the thesis in Politics I 2. Whereas (b) The second option provides us with a sound approach to the puzzle at hand. Furthermore, it is argued that the exegetical plausibility of the suggested reading of the thesis in Politics I 2 (1253a18–27) may be bolstered if we note that, for Aristotle, the polis is a particular kind of hylomorphic whole.

Pathogen Avoidance and Outgroup Avoidance During the First Wave of the COVID‐19 Pandemic

AbstractBehavioral immune system (BIS) theory explains that humans possess an adaptive psychological mechanism that helps them stay away from potential sources of pathogens. The theory claims that potential sources of pathogens also include outgroups, such as racial and ethnic minorities, because outgroup members potentially carry infectious diseases to which ingroup members have not developed immunity. In order to examine this controversial claim, the current study investigated how outgroup avoidance was associated with other types of pathogen avoidance during the COVID‐19 pandemic. During the first wave of the COVID‐19 pandemic, participants from the United States (N = 386) responded to questions pertaining to pathogen threat, pathogen avoidance, and outgroup avoidance. The data were statistically analyzed to identify significant associations between those variables. The results indicated that outgroup avoidance was positively associated with avoidance of personal pathogen cues (i.e., social distancing) but no other types of pathogen cues (i.e., wearing a mask and washing hands). This result aligns with the recent theoretical argument that the outgroup avoidance activated by the BIS (e.g., xenophobia) is a byproduct of avoiding infected ingroup rather than outgroup individuals.

Twenty years on from Developmental Plasticity and Evolution: middle-range theories and how to test them.

In Developmental Plasticity and Evolution, Mary-Jane West-Eberhard argued that the developmental mechanisms that enable organisms to respond to their environment are fundamental causes of adaptation and diversification. Twenty years after publication of this book, this once so highly controversial claim appears to have been assimilated by a wealth of studies on 'plasticity-led' evolution. However, we suggest that the role of development in explanations for adaptive evolution remains underappreciated in this body of work. By combining concepts of evolvability from evolutionary developmental biology and quantitative genetics, we outline a framework that is more appropriate to identify developmental causes of adaptive evolution. This framework demonstrates how experimental and comparative developmental biology and physiology can be leveraged to put the role of plasticity in evolution to the test.

A Solicitous Science

Three visions of anthropology collided in San Cristóbal de las Casas, Chiapas in the 1950s. Infrastructural improvements, indigenista politics, and increased US social science funding intensified research on Indigenous Chiapas. The scene drew together imperial travelers, modernist ethnographers, and Mexican development administrators. Among them was Danish explorer-archaeologist Frans Blom, who struggled to establish his estate as a reputationally redeeming fieldwork institute. This article parses how some modernist anthropologists distanced themselves from Blom’s imperial legacy, while others pressed his ideas of cultural continuity into implicit, controversial claims for their centrality to ancient and modern Maya studies writ large.

Perspektif Hukum Laut Internasional: Illegal Fishing Di Kepulauan Natuna

Illegal fishing is a pressing issue in Indonesia, particularly in the Natuna Islands, where China's controversial nine-dash line claim has exacerbated the problem. This research focuses on the international law of the sea to address illegal fishing in the Natuna region. The research uses a qualitative method, which explores the legal framework in regulating illegal fishing. The findings highlight the legal challenges Indonesia faces in combating illegal fishing in the Natuna Islands, emphasizing the disruptive impact on marine ecosystems and national sovereignty. The research concludes that international law, particularly the 1982 UNCLOS, defines Indonesia's maritime boundaries, the 2001 IPOA on IUU Fishing classifies illegal fishing, and the 1995 Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries regulates fisheries management. In addition, the report also suggests that Indonesia request Particularly Sensitive Sea Area status from the International Maritime Organization for the Natuna Islands waters.

Disinformation on digital media platforms: A market-shaping approach

The proliferation of deceptive content online has led to the recognition that some actors in the digital media ecosystem profit from disinformation’s rapid spread. The reason is that a market designed to monetize engagement with fringe audiences encourages actors to create content that can go viral, hence creating financial incentives to circulate controversial claims, adversarial narratives, and deceptive content. The theoretical claim of this piece is that the actors and practices of digital media platforms can be analyzed through their market practices. Through this lens, scholars can study whether digital markets such as programmatic advertising, commercial content moderation, and influencer marketing make money from circulating disinformation. To show how disinformation is an expected outcome, not breakage, of the current media market in digital platforms, the article analyzes the business models of pre-digital broadcasting media, partisan media, and digital media platforms, finding qualitatively different forms of disinformation in each media market iteration.

Proposed Missions to Collect Samples for Analyzing Evidence of Life in the Venusian Atmosphere.

The recent and still controversial claim of phosphine detection in the venusian atmosphere has reignited consideration of whether microbial life might reside in its cloud layers. If microbial life were to exist within Venus' cloud deck, these microorganisms would have to be multi-extremophiles enclosed within the cloud aerosol particles. The most straightforward approach for resolving the question of their existence is to obtain samples of the cloud particles and analyze their interior. While developing technology has made sophisticated in situ analysis possible, more detailed information could be obtained by examining samples with instrumentation in dedicated ground-based facilities. Ultimately, therefore, Venus Cloud-level Sample Return Missions will likely be required to resolve the question of whether living organisms exist in the clouds of Venus. Two multiphase mission concepts are currently under development for combining in situ analyses with a sample return component. The Venus Life Finder architecture proposes collection of cloud particles in a compartment suspended from a balloon that floats for weeks at the desired altitude, while the Novel solUtion for Venus explOration and Lunar Exploitation (NUVOLE) concept involves a glider that cruises within the cloud deck for 1200 km collecting cloud aerosol particles through the key regions of interest. Both architectures propose a rocket-driven ascent with the acquired samples transported to a high venusian orbit as a prelude to returning to Earth or the Moon. Both future conceptual missions with their combined phases will contribute valuable information relative to the habitability of the clouds at Venus, but their fulfillment is decades away. We suggest that, in the meantime, a simplification of a glider cloud-level sample collection scenario could be accomplished in a shorter development time at a lower cost. Even if the cloud particles are not organic and show no evidence of living organisms, they would reveal critical insights about the natural history and evolution of Venus.

A Broader Vision for Homeopathy: Medicine Needs Healing, and Homeopathy Has a Part to Play.

The controversial claim that homeopathic medicines actively stimulate the innate capacity of body and mind for healing and repair demands continuing and energetic investigation. But regardless of the outcome of this scientific controversy, the reported changes associated with applying the homeopathic method are matters of clinical fact. There is thus a case to be made that the homeopathic approach, the way that it studies and construes the experience of illness in individual patients, enriches our understanding of health, illness and healing; and is itself an essential contribution that homeopathy can make to the advancement of medicine. Practitioners and researchers involved in homeopathy can, and should, be more energetic and forceful in making that case.

The Origin of Humanity and Evolution: Science and Scripture in Conversation

The Origin of Humanity and Evolution: Science and Scripture in Conversation

Self-Verifying Depression in Retrospect: More Depressed People Reconstruct the Past to Seem More Depressed

Introduction: Self-verification theory makes the controversial claim that people higher in depression seek to confirm their depressed identity. Recent evidence suggests that people with higher self-reported depression severity alter their reports of self-relevant information to seem depressed. This article discusses the results of two preregistered studies that examined whether people with higher self-reported depression severity will distort memories of previously encoded events to seem depressed. Methods: In Studies 1 and 2, participants (total N = 665) self-reported their depression severity and then completed a (sham) perceptual task that could presumably diagnose the possession of a brain type that causes depression symptoms. Results: Across the two studies, depression severity (apart from negative affectivity or gender) was related to how people distorted their memories on the task; specifically, people with relatively “high” depression severity distorted their recalls to seem as if they had the depression-prone brain, and people with relatively “low” depression severity showed the opposite bias. These effects did not involve conscious awareness of distortion and had downstream effects on people's self-concepts. Discussion: Broadly, the data align with the possibility that people relatively higher in depression are prone to exhibit biases in reconstructive memory that validate their depressive symptoms.

Why the debunking threat won’t go away

A central claim often made to debunk religious beliefs is that they would be formed regardless of whether they are true or false. One way to support this claim is to apply findings from the cognitive science of religion. However, this use of science in an argument against religious beliefs has been strongly criticized. This article is about weaknesses in that criticism. I consider two arguments. Firstly, the critic of debunking can argue that the debunker makes empirically dubious claims about the origin of religious beliefs. I argue that the debunker can avoid this problem because the controversial empirical claims are not necessary. General naturalistic assumptions about the origin of religion also create worries that support the central debunking claim. The second criticism focuses on the highly general nature of the claims or assumptions debunkers make about the origin of religious beliefs. Critics maintain that such claims or assumptions, even if true, fail to affect the specific religious beliefs you or I form. I respond, arguing that this criticism fails to engage with the most prominent version of debunking, which aims at classes of beliefs. Furthermore, by making a detour through a related discussion in metaethics, I show how this version of the debunking argument can be extended in such a fashion that it applies to a given individual who forms a religious belief.

A third way to the selected effect/causal role distinction in the great encode debate.

Since the ENCODE project published its final results in a series of articles in 2012, there is no consensus on what its implications are. ENCODE's central and most controversial claim was that there is essentially no junk DNA: most sections of the human genome believed to be «junk» are functional. This claim was met with many reservations. If researchers disagree about whether there is junk DNA, they have first to agree on a concept of function and how function, given a particular definition, can be discovered. The ENCODE debate centered on a notion of function that assumes a strong dichotomy between evolutionary and non-evolutionary function and causes, prevalent in the Modern Evolutionary Synthesis. In contrast to how the debate is typically portrayed, both sides share a commitment to this distinction. This distinction is, however, much debated in alternative approaches to evolutionary theory, such as the EES. We show that because the ENCODE debate is grounded in a particular notion of function, it is unclear how it connects to broader debates about what is the correct evolutionary framework. Furthermore, we show how arguments brought forward in the controversy, particularly arguments from mathematical population genetics, are deeply embedded in their particular disciplinary contexts, and reflect substantive assumptions about the evolution of genomes. With this article, we aim to provide an anatomy of the ENCODE debate that offers a new perspective on the notions of function both sides employed, as well as to situate the ENCODE debate within wider debates regarding the forces operating in evolution.

O-089 Using ChatGPT to answer patient questions about fertility: the quality of information generated by a deep learning language model

Abstract Study question What is the quality of information provided by ChatGPT when using common patient questions as prompts? Summary answer Overall, the quality of the information generated by ChatGPT was high with little evidence of commercial bias. What is known already People seeking fertility-related information rely on internet sources when deciding on reproductive planning and assisted conception. The quality of information within the commercial landscape of infertility treatment is poor. ChatGPT, a variant of Generative Pre-trained Transformer v3 (GPT-3), is a language model that uses deep learning to generate human-like text. Given prompts, it generates answers by predicting the next word in the sequence based on patterns learned from training data. The training data for GPT-3 is not curated, but a snapshot of the Web, which includes all kinds of information, including biases that may exist within sources. Study design, size, duration Ten common patient questions were used as prompts. Three questions related to fertility awareness (impact of female/ male age on fertility and fertile window in the menstrual cycle), one to the chance of success with IVF, one to elective egg freezing, one to the benefits of add-ons, one to PCOS and pregnancy, one to choosing a fertility clinic, and one to how many IVF cycles should be attempted. Participants/materials, setting, methods Two experts independently scored the quality of the information generated by the ChatGPT using a scoring matrix with a range of 0 to 7 where higher scores indicate higher quality. Text was rated against humanistic answers based on how well it corresponded (0-3), evidence of commercial bias or controversial claims (no = 1, yes=0), use of accurate proportions/ statistics and whether it was stated that medical advice should be sought (yes=1, no = 0). Main results and the role of chance The scores returned by the two experts were closely aligned with only one point difference for one of the answers. This discrepancy was resolved through discussion. While none of the answers received the maximum score of 7, 6/10 scored 5 or more and 3 received a score of 3-4. Only one answer, the answer to the question about the benefits of add-ons, scored less than 3. This was also the only question where the response had evidence of commercial bias and one of only two that made claims that could be considered controversial. Limitations, reasons for caution The scoring method used in this study has not been validated and is exploratory in nature as this area of evaluation is emerging. However, the use of expert evaluation is common when assessing the performance of machine learning models and often used to fine-tune their parameters and improve their performance. Wider implications of the findings It is known that people seeking fertility-related information rely heavily on online sources such as clinic websites, consumer advocacy organisations, patient support groups and social media. Our findings suggests that ChatGPT may be a useful tool for patients seeking factual and unbiased information regarding fertility and fertility treatment. Trial registration number Not applicable