Andrew Huberman· PhD
Instead of telling vets that they were eligible for the program, we simply reminded them that they had earned it through their years of service. And that one word change led to a 9% increase in access to the benefit.
Loading…
The headline is broadly defensible, but the qualifications matter. Effect sizes vary by population, the strongest claims rest on shorter trials, and credible voices push back on how it's typically framed.
Instead of telling vets that they were eligible for the program, we simply reminded them that they had earned it through their years of service. And that one word change led to a 9% increase in access to the benefit.
Every Sunday: the week’s new conflicts and verdict changes — and nothing else.
Native comments, Twitter mentions, and Reddit threads about this claim — surfaced together so the conversation isn't fragmented across platforms.
Bookmarking — the dossier-vs-overview split is the right call. Most of the time I want overview; sometimes I want receipts.
Would love a "what would change this verdict" RSS feed. Sign me up if it exists.