<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Keepin&#8217; It Topical: The Big Facebook Study</title>
	<atom:link href="http://popsych.org/keepin-it-topical-the-big-facebook-study/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://popsych.org/keepin-it-topical-the-big-facebook-study/</link>
	<description>The Internet&#039;s Best Evolutionary Psycholo-guy</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 03 Jan 2018 01:05:13 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.4.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Chris Kavanagh</title>
		<link>http://popsych.org/keepin-it-topical-the-big-facebook-study/#comment-989</link>
		<dc:creator>Chris Kavanagh</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 03 Jul 2014 19:22:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://popsych.org/?p=3251#comment-989</guid>
		<description>I&#039;ve seen it definitely but it&#039;s not so common in articles on PNAS and it is rarely as egregious as this example.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;ve seen it definitely but it&#8217;s not so common in articles on PNAS and it is rarely as egregious as this example.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jesse Marczyk</title>
		<link>http://popsych.org/keepin-it-topical-the-big-facebook-study/#comment-988</link>
		<dc:creator>Jesse Marczyk</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 03 Jul 2014 04:30:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://popsych.org/?p=3251#comment-988</guid>
		<description>The visual anchoring issue is pretty common in most psychology research, from what I&#039;ve seen. Nothing makes a 0.1 difference on a ten-point scale pop like zooming way, way in.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The visual anchoring issue is pretty common in most psychology research, from what I&#8217;ve seen. Nothing makes a 0.1 difference on a ten-point scale pop like zooming way, way in.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Chris Kavanagh</title>
		<link>http://popsych.org/keepin-it-topical-the-big-facebook-study/#comment-987</link>
		<dc:creator>Chris Kavanagh</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 03 Jul 2014 01:06:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://popsych.org/?p=3251#comment-987</guid>
		<description>Nothing to add except that I want to emphasis that I too &quot;think different(ly)&quot; and am glad someone succinctly summed up while this study is largely a non-issue. The fact that they were allowed to get away with the anchoring on their graphs y-axis is also quite remarkable.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Nothing to add except that I want to emphasis that I too &#8220;think different(ly)&#8221; and am glad someone succinctly summed up while this study is largely a non-issue. The fact that they were allowed to get away with the anchoring on their graphs y-axis is also quite remarkable.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
