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.
what I'm about to tell you is as close as anything is to proof, in science, we rarely talk about proof, we talk about evidence in favor or against a hypothesis, but as close as possible to proof that our interpretation, our subjective interpretation of a sensory event is immensely powerful for dictating our experience of the event.
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.
Our interpretation our subjective interpretation of a sensory event is immensely powerful for dictating our experience of the event