Infographic Image Generation Prompt

"When Brilliant People Believe Wrong Things: Cognitive Bias in High-Stakes Science"

For use with: DALL·E 3, Midjourney, Adobe Firefly, Ideogram, or equivalent text-to-image model
Verified claims: See 02-verification-report.md
Layout spec: See 03-layout-spec.yaml

CRITICAL RENDERING INSTRUCTION

Render the following exact text verbatim. Do not substitute any numbers, paraphrase any labels, or invent additional statistics, rows, or citations. All percentages, author names, years, and institution names must appear exactly as written below. If you cannot render any text element legibly at the requested size, omit it rather than approximating it.

Full Image Generation Prompt

Create a portrait-format scientific infographic poster (2400×3200 pixels, 300 DPI) with a deep navy/charcoal background (#0D1117). Use amber (#E8C547) as the primary accent color, cool blue (#4FC3F7) for data callouts, and red (#EF5350) for warning/strike markers. All body text in off-white (#F0F0F0). Section panel backgrounds slightly lighter (#1A2332).

ZONE 1 — HEADER (top 12% of poster, full width)

Large bold title in amber: "When Brilliant People Believe Wrong Things"

Below it, in white: "Cognitive Bias in High-Stakes Science"

Below that, in small italic gray: "A case study from quantum computing research, 2018–2026"

ZONE 2 — CENTRAL ILLUSTRATION (next 18%, centered)

Illustrate a split-brain silhouette viewed from above, dividing left and right hemispheres.

Left hemisphere (rational): Clean orthogonal grid of data points. A perfectly balanced scale with equal weights. Clear, organized lines. Cool blue lighting.

Right hemisphere (emotionally biased): The same data points, but seen through a convex distorting lens — some enlarged, some invisible. Mismatched gears half-assembled. Amber glow radiating from the center suggesting heat and pressure.

No text within the illustration itself.

Below the illustration, centered in small italic gray: "The brain under competitive pressure processes the same evidence differently"

ZONE 3 — BIAS GRID (next 38%, 2×2 grid of equal panels, slight gap between panels)

Each panel has a dark section background (#1A2332), rounded corners, and a small icon in the top-left corner. Panel header in bold amber. Case anchor line in cool blue. Biology note in italic gray at the bottom of each panel.

Panel 1 — Top Left: SUNK COST TRAP

Icon: Small illustration of an hourglass sinking into a pile of coins.

Header in bold amber: THE SUNK COST TRAP

Body text in white: "Once large investments are made, abandoning them feels like accepting a loss — and losses feel ~2× more painful than equivalent gains feel rewarding."

Citation in italic gray: (Kahneman & Tversky, Econometrica, 1979)

Case anchor in blue: Case: ~16 yrs · est. $1B+ in topological qubits

Biology note in italic gray: "Loss aversion is encoded in the amygdala — it fires harder for potential losses than for equivalent gains"

Panel 2 — Top Right: CONFIRMATION BIAS

Icon: Small illustration of a funnel/filter with only matching shapes passing through; non-matching shapes blocked.

Header in bold amber: CONFIRMATION BIAS

Body text in white: "Seeking or interpreting evidence in ways partial to existing beliefs. Contradictory data is not suppressed deliberately — it is perceived as noise."

Citation in italic gray: (Nickerson, Review of General Psychology, 1998)

Case anchor in blue: Case: Favorable data presented; contradictory data omitted

Biology note in italic gray: "The brain's pattern-matching systems prioritize confirming signals — a feature, not a bug, until the stakes are high"

Panel 3 — Bottom Left: MOTIVATED REASONING

Icon: Small illustration of a trophy or competitor's medal beside a line graph that is being subtly bent toward an upward trend.

Header in bold amber: MOTIVATED REASONING

Body text in white: "Competitive goals shape which results researchers pursue and how they interpret ambiguous findings — while the reasoner maintains an illusion of objectivity."

Citation in italic gray: (Kunda, Psychological Bulletin, 1990)

Case anchor in blue: Case: IBM & Google advancing → intense pressure to show progress

Biology note in italic gray: "Dopamine reward pathways reinforce finding what we expect to find — making motivated perception feel like honest discovery"

Panel 4 — Bottom Right: PRESTIGE AS PROOF

Icon: Small illustration of a scientific journal cover with a gold star badge; a magnifying glass hovering over it but tilted away, not actually examining the content.

Header in bold amber: PRESTIGE AS PROOF

Body text in white: "Institutions use top-journal publication as a signal that results are validated. But peer review is a filter, not a guarantee — and >80% of published papers report positive results."

Citation in italic gray: (Fanelli, PLOS ONE, 2010)

Case anchor in blue: Case: Nature publication cited as proof; coding errors not caught

Biology note in italic gray: "Authority signals bypass critical evaluation — a cognitive shortcut that works until the authority is wrong"

ZONE 4 — TIMELINE (next 14%, full width, horizontal)

Section header centered in bold amber: THREE STRIKES: THE MICROSOFT MAJORANA PATTERN

Draw a horizontal dashed amber line spanning the full width with three circular nodes:

Node 1 — Left Year in bold red: 2018 Label in bold red: RETRACTED Detail in white below: "Majorana signatures paper withdrawn from Nature"

Node 2 — Center Year in bold red: 2021 Label in bold red: RETRACTED Detail in white below: "Quantized Majorana conductance paper retracted"

Node 3 — Right Year in bold amber: 2026 Label in bold amber: CHALLENGED Detail in white below: "Legg Nature critique: coding errors, flawed protocol, omitted data"

On the amber background, in bold dark charcoal text (#0D1117), centered:

"Prestigious publication is a starting point for scientific evaluation — not an endpoint. The same biases that shape individual decisions operate at institutional scale."

Below that in small gray text: "Sources: Kahneman & Tversky (1979) · Arkes & Blumer (1985) · Nickerson (1998) · Kunda (1990) · Fanelli (2010) · Legg, Nature (2026) DOI: 10.1038/s41586-026-10567-8"

ZONE 6 — COURSE CREDIT (bottom-right corner, very small)

Small gray text: "A Skeptic's Guide to Quantum Computing · dmccreary.github.io/quantum-computing"

Style Notes for the Image Model

Overall aesthetic: dark-mode science poster, similar to Nature or Science special issue covers
Typography: sans-serif throughout (Helvetica Neue or Inter style)
Panels: equal-size quadrants with 16px gap between them, 8px rounded corners
No decorative stock photography — all visuals are simple, clean iconographic illustrations
Brain illustration is a stylized top-down silhouette (not anatomically detailed)
Icons are flat/minimal — no gradients, no 3D effects, no shadows
Color discipline: amber for emphasis and headers, blue for case anchors, red only for the two retraction nodes, gray for citations and biology notes
The poster should feel authoritative and analytical, not alarmist or sensationalized

Claim Provenance Index

Every numbered claim in the poster traces to a specific source:

Text in poster	Source	Verified?
"~2× more painful"	Kahneman & Tversky, Econometrica 1979	VERIFIED
"~16 yrs · est. $1B+"	Press reports; "est." prefix required	DIRECTIONAL
"partial to existing beliefs"	Nickerson, Rev. Gen. Psychology 1998	VERIFIED
">80% positive results"	Fanelli, PLOS ONE 2010	VERIFIED
"illusion of objectivity"	Kunda, Psychological Bulletin 1990	VERIFIED
"2018 · 2021 · 2026"	Nature retractions + Legg 2026 critique	VERIFIED
Biology notes (amygdala, dopamine)	Established neuroscience; qualitative framing	QUALITATIVE

No fabricated statistics appear in this poster.