4 ms·
> Are these types of results generally reproducible? How do we know they are valid? It's a new study, so no-one had the opportunity to reproduce their findings
by guenthert 6y ago
> Are these types of results generally reproducible? How do we know they are valid?
It's a new study, so no-one had the opportunity to reproduce their findings yet. Generally in the scientific community, one tries to find the flaw in their argument/methods, rather then presuming them to be faulty.
It doesn't seem like a very complicated, time consuming or costly experiment (compared with e.g. the search for the higgs boson), so I'd think it's reasonable to expect another team to reproduce the results in the near future, if there is sufficient interest.
- nerdponx 6y agoMy question was more about the EEG method in general. Even if this one result is new, surely this method has been used many times in the past. So no, I am not just assuming the study is faulty. I am asking a specific question about the validity of one of the core study methods.
- canadaduane 6y ago> compared with e.g. the search for the higgs boson Understatement of the month, haha. I don't suppose you debate in engineering circles?
- guenthert 6y agoI do, but perhaps not very well ;-} I mentioned the search for the higgs boson only as it leaves me uneasy, that it was so expensive, that I doubt in my lifetime any team will attempt to reproduce the results.