Document Type

Article

Publication Date

1-2016

Keywords

bullshit, intention, meaning

Abstract

In reply to Dalton (2016), the authors argue that bullshit is defined in terms of how it is produced, not how it is interpreted. They agree that it can be interpreted as profound by some readers (and assumed as much in the original paper). Nonetheless, they present additional evidence against the possibility that more reflective thinkers are more inclined to interpret bullshit statements as profound.

Faculty

Faculty of Humanities & Social Sciences

School

School of Humanities and Creativity

Journal

Judgment and Decision Making

Version

Publisher's version

Peer Reviewed/Refereed Publication

yes

Funder

Funding for this study was provided by the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada.

Terms of Use

Terms of Use for Works posted in SOURCE.

Original Publication Citation

Pennycook, G., Cheyne J. A., Barr, N., Koehler, D. J., & Fugelsang, J. A. (2016) It's still bullshit: Reply to Dalton. Judgment and Decision Making, 11(1), 123–125.

Share

COinS