Hacker News Reader

The way these studies are reported do more harm than good. The studies prove basically nothing but get reported in a way that people draw wide inferences from them and think they are based in fact. Even the discussion in this thread all just assumes that this study backs up what the title says.

View on HN

I agree. Even when scientific journalism is responsible, there's a concerning trend on social media, esp. reddit, where a study appears to be judged by how interesting the headline is, and its rigor is seldom discussed (e.g. an unreviewed paper by researchers working with limited data will likely overshadow more thorough but less exciting studies).

But this isn't even responsible science journalism.

The blame also lies with the study authors and the peer reviewers for allowing the article to make these claims based on their results. E.g. from the abstract

As a consequence [of our hypothesis], people overestimate the extent to which recipients of their self-promotion will feel proud of and happy for them, and underestimate the extent to which recipients will feel annoyed (Experiments 1 and 2). Because people tend to promote themselves excessively when trying to make a favorable impression on others, such efforts often backfire, causing targets of self-promotion to view self-promoters as less likeable and as braggarts (Experiment 3).

Reply on news.ycombinator.com