Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
DEAL: For $25 - Add A Second Phone Number To Your Smartphone for life! Use promo code SLASHDOT25. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 Internet speed test! ×
Medicine

Submission + - study: data analysis poor in neuroscience journals (guardian.co.uk)

doug141 writes: Analyzing for a difference is easy. But analyzing a difference of a differences is done incorrectly half the time in studies published in neuroscience journals.
Nieuwenhuis looked at 513 papers published in five prestigious neuroscience journals over two years. In half the 157 studies where this error could have been made, it was. They broadened their search to 120 cellular and molecular articles in Nature Neuroscience, during 2009 and 2010: they found 25 studies committing this fallacy, and not one single paper analysed differences in effect sizes correctly.

This discussion was created for logged-in users only, but now has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

study: data analysis poor in neuroscience journals

Comments Filter:

"Maintain an awareness for contribution -- to your schedule, your project, our company." -- A Group of Employees

Working...