Mriana, & truthaddict,
I’m going to have to disagree with you both on the question of Daniel Gilbert being a “pop psychologist” and avoiding peer review. I’m a little confused about where your information is coming from?
But, perhaps you would like to just take a few minutes and look over his peer reviewed published papers from his web site, which also offers other published material from scientific journals.
http://www.wjh.harvard.edu/~dtg/gilbert.htm —the journal entries are under, ‘writing’.
I plead (intentional) ignorance. my comment that you are referring to really had nothing to do with Gilbert. I made a comment about pseudo-scientists in general. I really wasnt following it more than what Mriana wrote. go back and read it as a sarcastic comment in general about writers pretending to be scientists who ignore peer review and opt to sell catchy phrases to the public (ie intelligent design, origin of consciousness and the bicameral mind, etc).