Think Deeply, Think Well.
Founded by Drs. Sara and Jack Gorman, authors of the revolutionary new title ‘Denying to the Grave’, Critica is a community committed to making rational decisions about health and security. In a culture dominated by polarizing politics, and an abundance of unchecked misinformation, Critica exists to revolutionize the role of science in making rational health decisions.
Recent Updates
See what we’ve been up to lately at Critica.
Denying to the Grave: Why We Ignore the Facts that Will Save Us
The gap between what scientific evidence shows and the public believes has never been wider. In “Denying to the Grave: Why We Ignore the Facts that Will Save Us” Drs. Sara and Jack Gorman explore the reason behind science denial. The renowned father-daughter team call upon psychology, behavioral economics, epidemiology, and neuroscience to identify six basic reasons that people refuse to accept scientific findings. Using case studies such as vaccination refusal, personal gun ownership, climate change denial, and fear of GMOs, the authors show that even highly intelligent people are prone to fall victim to false conspiracy theories, anti-science charismatic leaders, and the confirmation bias, to make errant risk predictions and to shun scientific complexity. The Gormans make seven explicit recommendations for closing the gap between scientists and the lay public, placing the burden on scientists, journalists, educators, and all consumers of scientific information.
Will science survive in a ‘post-truth’ society?
Following the publication of our critically acclaimed book, Denying to the Grave, Jack and I are launching Critica, a place for respectful dialogue about health and security matters. Come join us in exploring the ways our psychology and perceptions lead us to misguided decisions, and help us develop methods and programs for making informed ones.
Commentary
Read our take on important and relevant health and science topics.
Statisticians to the Barricades
While generalizations about any group are always perilous, it is probably fair to say that statisticians are not usually thought of as prone to vociferous public protest. Yet, when recently invited to sign on to a paper protesting the way scientists decide whether a finding is “statistically significant,” more than 800 scientists whose work depends […]
What People Are Reading About Science, Health, and Personal Safety
There are three parts to effective science communication, two of which have robust infrastructure. The first leg is scientist to scientist: it is easy for scientists to find out what other scientists are thinking about—scientific publications and conferences abound in which every new finding, controversy, and dispute can be rehearsed in detail. The second leg […]
Read More Commentary Articles → Subscribe to Commentary Articles →