Probably a mistake, as the article discusses that paper later on. The study in question is probably http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S00283932

Probably a mistake, as the article discusses that paper later on. The study in question is probably http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0028393214002395 http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0028393214...