 Finally, related to this last observation, Horowitz (2019) and Schoenfield (2015b, 2018) both argue that higher-order evidence is predictably misleading: if it has first-order effects, we can predict a priori that it will lead ideally rational thinkers away from the truth. We expect first-order evidence to generally make us more accurate, provided that we respond to it rationally. And we expect higher-order evidence to lead us away from what our first-order evidence supports. So when we accommodate all of that evidence rationally, we’ll tend to end up with a less accurate belief state than we would if we had ignored the higher-order evidence.