

Oh, they do have psychological manipulation in mind.
There are 2 leading design types:
No clocks anywhere, designed to be difficult to navigate out of, designed to make the passage of time difficult to tell.
And open and bright with easy lines of sight, designed to allow gamblers to relax without leaving.
https://www.casinousa.com/blog/psychology-of-casino-design
The former was developed by an ex-gambler that “turned their life around” into an architect that manipulates gamblers to gamble more. He studied the successful casinos, and gathered up all the techniques that makes gamblers gamble more.
The open layout was developed in response to this, and solely concentrates on making gamblers feel relaxed (or able to relax).
But lighting, layout, smells, sounds… Everything is accounted for.
Casino owners know the design of their casino is what makes gamblers gamble more
Yeh it is.
Proving that a scientific theory is wrong means we don’t understand enough about the thing. And we know we need to look at other theories about the thing.
Proving things wrong as well as failed hypothesis is as important (even if it is disappointing) as proving things correct and successful hypothesis. It rules the theory out, and guides further scientific study.
With published papers, other scientists can hopefully see what the publishing scientists missed.
Scientists can also repeat experiments of successful papers to confirm the papers conclusion, and perhaps even make further observations that can support further studies.