Correction: Analytical Models vs Intuition
Corrected by Emir Baycan · Full-Stack Developer, Mobile App Builder and Web Platform Founder with expertise in SEO, automation, SaaS, AI visibility, DevOps and scalable digital products
Emir Baycan found something wrong, outdated, or unsupported on this page and proposed a fix. The publisher accepted the correction.
- Role
- Correction
- Publisher
- When Notes Fly
- Topic
- Concepts
- Status
- Accepted
- Date
- 28 July 2026
The exact change
The article attributed a deterioration-accuracy finding to Tanner 2001, framed Danziger as comparing recidivism predictions with regression, cited a Lieberman-Eisenberger 2003 Psychological Review X/C-system paper, claimed a 2012 Dijksterhuis unconscious-thought advantage, and described Goldman 1996 as showing an algorithm beat cardiologists.
Fixed each attribution and study description to the primary record and flagged the contested status of the unconscious-thought effect.
Suggested change
See before/after.
Why this is better
Several citations named the wrong author, journal, year, or study design. Corrections fix the attributions and scope the claims rather than adding new sources.
How this record is verified
- The contribution is tied to a real, identified contributor, not an anonymous byline.
- It counts only because the publisher, When Notes Fly, accepted it. Self-claimed work earns nothing.
- It is recorded against a specific page and cannot be bought or edited after the fact.