Extraordinary claims, extraordinary evidence? A discussion

Richard M Shiffrin; Dora Matzke; Jonathon D Crystal; E-J Wagenmakers; Suyog H Chandramouli; Joachim Vandekerckhove; Marco Zorzi; Richard D Morey; Mary C Murphy

doi:10.3758/s13420-021-00474-5

Extraordinary claims, extraordinary evidence? A discussion

Learn Behav. 2021 Sep;49(3):265-275. doi: 10.3758/s13420-021-00474-5. Epub 2021 Aug 10.

Authors

Richard M Shiffrin¹, Dora Matzke², Jonathon D Crystal¹, E-J Wagenmakers³, Suyog H Chandramouli⁴, Joachim Vandekerckhove⁵, Marco Zorzi^{6

7}, Richard D Morey⁸, Mary C Murphy¹

Affiliations

¹ Indiana University, Bloomington, IN, USA.
² Department of Psychological Methods, Room G 0.29, University of Amsterdam, Nieuwe Achtergracht 129B, PO Box 15906, 1001 NK, Valckenierstraat 59, 1018 XE, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
³ Department of Psychological Methods, Room G 0.29, University of Amsterdam, Nieuwe Achtergracht 129B, PO Box 15906, 1001 NK, Valckenierstraat 59, 1018 XE, Amsterdam, the Netherlands. EJ.Wagenmakers@gmail.com.
⁴ University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.
⁵ University of California, Irvine, Irvine, CA, USA.
⁶ University of Padova, Padova, Italy.
⁷ IRCCS San Camillo Hospital, Lido Venice, Italy.
⁸ Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK.

Abstract

Roberts (2020, Learning & Behavior, 48[2], 191-192) discussed research claiming honeybees can do arithmetic. Some readers of this research might regard such claims as unlikely. The present authors used this example as a basis for a debate on the criterion that ought to be used for publication of results or conclusions that could be viewed as unlikely by a significant number of readers, editors, or reviewers.

Keywords: Comparative cognition; Evidence; Extraordinary claims; Numerical cognition; Publication criteria.

MeSH terms

Animals
Bees
Learning*