<p>Shiffrin et al. argue that scientific practice often produces illusions of understanding; situations in which familiar inferential tools generate misplaced confidence. We describe a related illusion that arises not from statistical misapplications, but from ordinary theory testing itself. Here we highlight a different source of epistemic uncertainty or overconfidence; one that emerges even when statistical tools are used correctly, effect sizes are precisely estimated, findings replicate without controversy, and heterogeneity is explicitly acknowledged within hierarchical models.</p>