On getting it right by being wrong: A case study of how flawed research may become self-fulfilling at last

Scientists prominently argue that the COVID-19 pandemic stems not least from people's inability to understand exponential growth. They increasingly cite evidence from a classic psychological experiment published some 45 years prior to the first case of COVID-19. Despite-or precisely because of-becoming such a canonical study (more often cited than read), its critical design flaws went completely unnoticed. They are discussed here as a cautionary tale against uncritically enshrining unsound research in the lore of a field of research. In hindsight, this is a unique case study of researchers falling prey to just the cognitive bias they set out to study-undermining an experiment's methodology while, ironically, still supporting its conclusion.

Automated summary

Scientists argue that people's inability to understand exponential growth contributes to the COVID-19 pandemic. They refer to evidence from a classic psychological experiment conducted 45 years prior to the pandemic. However, the experiment's critical flaws were not noticed, highlighting the importance of critically assessing research before considering it as a foundation in a field of study.