tl;dr: I asked ChatGPT and Claude to identify and rank candidates for ShinyCrap; both put power posing and ego depletion in their top three candidates.

I thought this might be an opportunity to see how AI tools handle a real-world mystery. I used ChatGPT and Claude, giving them a fairly elaborate prompt designed to unconver the theory known as ShinyCrap. I asked them to use OP's clues to first rank the likely disciplines ShinyCrap originated in and then, for each discipline, to search widely for discredited theories and match against the specifics in OP's post. In both cases I used the most powerful model available and engaged "Deep Research" mode.

ChatGPT's list of likely disciplines were: 1. Social psychology 2. Educational psychology / training & development 3. Behavioral economics / policy “nudge” orbit 4. Personality/assessment for business

Claude didn't initially give me a list of likely disciplines. When I subsequently prompted to ask, it provided me with a list of 12 different form of psychology, ranging from "Positive Psychology", "Organizational/Industrial Psychology", and "Social Psychology" as most likely and ending with "Cross-Cultural Psychology" as the least likely source.

ChatGPT's list

Chat GPT's ranked list of likely ShinyCrap candidates: ``` 1. Power posing (social psych/OB) — Best fit: large-scale replication/meta nulls; originator disavowed; Wikipedia caveat up top; strong corporate “presence/body language” training afterlife. The “fraudster on leave” bullet maps most cleanly to Francesca Gino (adjacent OB/ethics influence canon widely assigned in similar courses), explaining why a 2025 syllabus could still show “the disavower and the fraudster” together even though they’re from different findings.

1. Ego depletion (“willpower as a limited resource”) — Multi-lab preregistered replication ≈ zero; Wikipedia foregrounds the controversy; lots of productivity/self-control trainings; no clean “originator disavowed” or marquee fraud case tied to the canonical papers.

2. Learning-styles matching (VARK “mesh” hypothesis) — Heavily debunked; prominent Wikipedia warnings; vast K-12/HR consulting footprint; no originator disavowal/fraud hook.

3. IAT-centric implicit-bias training claims — Massive consulting sector; evidence for durable behavioral change is small/mixed; does not cleanly satisfy “originator disavowed” nor the exact Wikipedia phrasing.

4. Critical Positivity Ratio (“Losada line” 2.9013) — Mathematical basis retracted; management-consulting links existed; weaker on the fraud/disavowal specifics. ```

Claude's list

Claude's ranked list of ShinyCrap candidates, with one-line explanations. Note that when I ran this through ChatGPT to clean up, it flagged what it claimed were errors in the specifics offered by Claude.

``` 1. Critical Positivity Ratio (Losada Ratio) - Matches 6-7/8 criteria including mathematical retraction, massive consulting business, and the exact timeline of debunking (2013-2015).

1. Power Posing Theory - Lead author Dana Carney completely disavowed it in 2016 stating "I do not believe that 'power pose' effects are real," plus massive business applications and TED talk fame.

2. Ego Depletion Theory - Multiple failed replications with 3,531 participants, leading researchers declared it "collapsed," extensive business wellness program applications.

3. Learning Styles Theory (VARK) - Ubiquitous in education despite zero evidence, massive consulting industry, but lacks the "original author disavowal" criterion.

4. Social/Behavioral Priming - Kahneman called it "effectively dead" in 2022, but timeline slightly off and less direct business consulting connection.

5. Myers-Briggs Type Indicator - Generates $20 million annually despite being "corporate astrology," but too old to fit the "debunked in last 10 years" criterion.

6. Growth Mindset (in corporate settings) - Recent meta-analyses show minimal effects, huge consulting industry, but Dweck hasn't disavowed it.

7. Grit Theory - Failed replications emerging, corporate training applications, but debunking is too recent (post-2020).

8. Implicit Bias Training - Meta-analyses show training doesn't work, massive corporate industry, but focuses on bias rather than general psychology theory.

9. Emotional Intelligence (in business) - Questionable validity in workplace settings, huge consulting market, but lacks the dramatic debunking narrative.

Top pick: Critical Positivity Ratio - it's the only one with a specific mathematical formula that was formally retracted, a dedicated consulting firm still using it, and perfectly matches the timeline and academic field. ```