Talk:Easiness effect

	Science portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Science, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Science on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ScienceWikipedia:WikiProject ScienceTemplate:WikiProject Sciencescience articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Skepticism Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Skepticism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science, pseudoscience, pseudohistory and skepticism related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SkepticismWikipedia:WikiProject SkepticismTemplate:WikiProject SkepticismSkepticism articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Village pump discussion[edit]

This Village pump discussion is the reason this stub article exists, so I'm rounding up the participants; Sizeofint, Diego Moya, and Boud to help improve the article. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 11:50, 4 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Bravo for starting the article! :) Unfortunately, Public Understanding of Science presently keep most of their articles non-open-access for funding/egalitarian reasons, so right now I don't have access to the Scharrer et al research paper. I can empathise with the reasons, but it does look quite absurd in the present epoch and given the aim of the journal! Anyway, I used the quotes I had presently pasted, the abstract, and what I remembered generally. Boud (talk) 01:46, 30 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for working on the article. After reading it, it was initially unclear if it was about justifications for denialism and alternative facts or a warning against that phenomenon. After following the sources to find out, I then added a sentence. —Paleo Neonate – 04:18, 30 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Educational Psychologist is also behind a paywall. Again an irony. Why should the psychology of education be secret? Do we really expect the public to take secret research seriously and not get into conspiracy theories? Boud (talk) 23:57, 16 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Expansion research in progress[edit]

This is something that I was aware of but not aware that it had a term or a page her. Bravo for making it. I'm gonna dive in hard and get some editing in next week. expect to see changes, expansions, and hopefully improvements to what is a nicely started article. Please watch it and add your thoughts along the way. Collaboration is king here. Rap Chart Mike (talk) 19:42, 3 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Based on one Research Study[edit]

Every citation summarizes the information from the SAGE publication and so if the research is faulty then every other source is faulty. Furthermore, Wikipedia does not allow citations from original research.Amyers98 (talk) 15:10, 21 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]