Released a paper that suggested "75% accuracy on 35 people" with admission of bias in the test set participant make-up. Sounds like the confidence interval wou

Released a paper that suggested "75% accuracy on 35 people" with admission of bias in the test set participant make-up. Sounds like the confidence interval would be very poor. This is exactly like all those other studies that found an effect in a small sample but didn't use basic statistics to realise what kind of sample size they would need to actually prove an effect. Nor (if I can tell) was there any acknowledgement about the fact that asking normal people to lie and trying to observe a hardened criminal / fundamentalist is not the same. I worked on something with an ex-chief of the flying squad who said that there is a huge difference.