Comments on: Reporting Preliminary Studies http://theness.com/neurologicablog/index.php/reporting-preliminary-studies/ Your Daily Fix of Neuroscience, Skepticism, and Critical Thinking Thu, 23 May 2013 18:31:32 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.4.1 By: petrossa http://theness.com/neurologicablog/index.php/reporting-preliminary-studies/comment-page-1/#comment-29654 petrossa Tue, 15 Feb 2011 16:30:00 +0000 http://theness.com/neurologicablog/?p=2826#comment-29654 Reminds me of the red meat causes cancer scare story. However in that case it was science itself at fault, here it's more bad journalism looking for a headline. But if one goes and compiles a list of like 'studies' you better create a wiki lemma, you'll need the space. What strikes me though that from exact sciences one sees these studies much less frequent. Either they are real scientists or the 'studies' aren't juicy enough. "Time shown to be a deciding factor in erosion!" Mm, no not juicy. Reminds me of the red meat causes cancer scare story. However in that case it was science itself at fault, here it’s more bad journalism looking for a headline.

But if one goes and compiles a list of like ‘studies’ you better create a wiki lemma, you’ll need the space.

What strikes me though that from exact sciences one sees these studies much less frequent. Either they are real scientists or the ‘studies’ aren’t juicy enough.

“Time shown to be a deciding factor in erosion!” Mm, no not juicy.

]]> By: eiskrystal http://theness.com/neurologicablog/index.php/reporting-preliminary-studies/comment-page-1/#comment-29636 eiskrystal Tue, 15 Feb 2011 08:59:08 +0000 http://theness.com/neurologicablog/?p=2826#comment-29636 This would seem to suggest that scientists sticking up poor studies in public should know better. This would seem to suggest that scientists sticking up poor studies in public should know better.

]]> By: Diane http://theness.com/neurologicablog/index.php/reporting-preliminary-studies/comment-page-1/#comment-29631 Diane Tue, 15 Feb 2011 03:22:59 +0000 http://theness.com/neurologicablog/?p=2826#comment-29631 It's also odd that they compared no soda to diet soda and said not a word about regular soda. That data must have been in their data set (because why would a survey ask about soda consumption and not include an option for regular soda?) and they must have looked at it (because why not?). The fact that they did not report anything suggests that they didn't find anything, which makes the significant association they did find look even more like the chance result of data dredging. It’s also odd that they compared no soda to diet soda and said not a word about regular soda. That data must have been in their data set (because why would a survey ask about soda consumption and not include an option for regular soda?) and they must have looked at it (because why not?). The fact that they did not report anything suggests that they didn’t find anything, which makes the significant association they did find look even more like the chance result of data dredging.

]]>