 A natural question then is: how often do real-world research communities face the kind of “hard” problem where the Zollman effect is a real concern? Rosenstock, Bruner, and O’Connor acknowledge that some laboratory experiments have found similar effects, where limiting communication between subjects leads to improved epistemic outcomes. But they also stress that the Zollman effect is not “robust,” requiring fairly specific circumstances to arise (small epsilon, a small research community, and not-too-large sample sizes). Since the above model is both simple and idealized, this lack of robustness should give us pause, they argue, about its likely applicability in real-world scenarios.