Gladwell is an excellent writer, but he does overstate his case in that book to serve the interest of a very good, gut-level story. I didn't read the above to ding him - just to set the record straight.
I feel very negative in this direction about Psychology Today - interesting stories, but even less, much less, below the surface. Gladwell at least gives footnotes and references actual researchers. He serves a critical function and serves it very well. PT reads more like a tabloid of science journalism.
Regarding this article, people have won the Nobel Prize in Economics after showing, at least twenty-five years ago, how bad we are at judging real-life risks. The scientists doing that work? Psychologists.
In terms of his writing? Not much, as he seems to research his subjects fairly well, and interview people that are psychologists or economists or whatever, when he needs that kind of material.
