3 ms·
"We tested two adult samples using two different sequence learning tasks." Two? Nothing to see here.
by HNJohnC 12y ago
"We tested two adult samples using two different sequence learning tasks."
Two? Nothing to see here.
- briandh 12y agoTwo samples, not two subjects. Still not definitive, but definitely "something to see" if their methodology holds up (I don't have access).
- wdewind 12y agoThis attitude is not helpful and actively damaging. Small sample sizes in science do serve a purpose: to get larger studies funded. It's as if the top comment to every ShowHN post was: "Not at $200mm in funding. Nothing to see here."
- HNJohnC 12y agoActively damaging? A little dramatic perhaps? I didn't say it doesn't serve a purpose, I said there is nothing to see here. Quite literally. Until they do a larger study why is it news?
- wdewind 12y agoIt is actively damaging to the community for you to take snipes at studies when the reason you are criticizing the study is not only unnecessary criticism that any layman could provide, it is actually a misinterpretation of the study. You didn't add anything to the discussion. As for why it is news, a lot of hackers are interested in mental health and mindfulness+meditation specifically and would be interested in more cutting edge news about it, rather than what ends up in the NYTimes 8 months later.
- bayesianhorse 12y agoI think they mean two different studies, not two subjects.
- sangfroid 12y agoI just got a copy of the paper from the researcher. They used 16 study participants. Still not a huge sample size, but big enough for consideration.