Priming studies suggested that coming across particular images or words (e.g. “wrinkle”) could have surprising effects on behaviour (e.g. slower walking pace). Many laypeople found this hard to believe, but Daniel Kahneman told them off in no uncertain terms:
…disbelief is not an option. The results are not made up, nor are they statistical flukes. You have no choice but to accept that the major conclusions of these studies are true.
This has not aged well, as many of the priming studies subsequently failed to replicate. Kahneman’s injunction might hold for physics (where rigorous evidence often establishes seemingly bizarre results), but social science is different: our research methods are weaker and our intuitive understanding stronger. Disbelief is often very much an option.
Common sense shapes social science
Similarly, common sense is devalued within social science. There’s an implicit ideal that we should follow our research methods mechanically, without appealing to common sense. But our methods simply aren’t good enough for that to work, and our common-sense knowledge is too valuable to ignore. We must apply common sense at every stage of the research process, from deciding what to study to making sense of the results. In practice, most social scientists do this, but they should be more open and explicit about it.
Social science shapes common sense
There is also the reverse mistake: overlooking the influence of social science on common sense. These days, most well-informed people know that the prices of goods are determined by supply and demand, not simply by how much labour it took to produce them. But it’s easy to forget that this is thanks to economics. Common sense often absorbs research insights, and our failure to see this makes us underestimate social science’s achievements.
The root of the problem is that we view common sense as more passive than it really is – reflecting our general neglect of human agency. In fact, common sense challenges, complements, and learns from social science.



Some social studies cannot be replicates because it is impossible to reproduce de same circumstances using different persons, different venues and different social contexts.
That being said, sociology is not to be taken serious as a discipline.
Is common sense just Bayesian priors?