4 ms·
Not exactly: it is ok to say that there were no original findings. This is a tiny semantic detail but important: if the author does not support his findings, it
by pfortuny 8y ago
Not exactly: it is ok to say that there were no original findings. This is a tiny semantic detail but important: if the author does not support his findings, it is OK to re-assert the null hypothesis but not to say that "the findings were wrong".
What I mean is: "no experiment" does not mean the same as "wrong experiment".
- iandanforth 8y agoWell, let's agree that 'wrong' doesn't mean 'bad.' I use the term in the Feynman sense, if your guess doesn't agree with experiment, it's wrong. The assertion that they found a statistically significant effect was wrong (or to Trevor's point in a sibling comment, is no longer true.)