Pauling Effect
Updated 2026-08-19
INTRODUCTION
English translation pending.
CORE DEFINITION
Named after Linus Pauling, who won two Nobel Prizes and later promoted the unsupported claim that high doses of vitamin C could treat serious illnesses, including cancer. His prestige delayed correction and lent credibility to a position that evidence did not support. The core claim is that expertise in one field does not transfer to another, while authority does. The qualification is that the effect describes how reputation distorts reception, and it does not imply that Pauling's chemical work was flawed.
SCAFFOLDING EFFECT
Reduce cognitive load
- Use Domain Check: Verify whether the authority's expertise covers the field in which the claim is made. - Use Authority Discount: Judge the evidence on its own merits rather than by the speaker's reputation. - Use Correction Planning: Expect that reversing a famous person's claim will take longer than the evidence alone would suggest.
Anchor fast decisions
Reputation built in one domain is transferred by audiences to claims in unrelated domains, because judging expertise is costly and prestige is an easy proxy. When the claim is wrong, the same proxy makes it hard to correct, since critics appear to be attacking a celebrated figure rather than an unsupported position. The authority therefore suppresses the normal correction process.
MINIMUM ACTION
In progress 0/1Practice this model in one real situation:
account_treeGenealogyexpand_more
menu_bookReferencesexpand_more
Source support: Explicit
- dx.mbahttps://dx.mba/blog/:pauling-effectverified
PRIVATE NOTES · Only visible to you
SAVED Q&A
ENTRY Q&A · Private saving available
Ask with a clear boundary
thinkingmodels answers from published entry context only.
Your question is sent to thinkingmodels. The answer uses public entry context only.
RELATED MODELS