News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on 50% of neuroscience papers suffer from a major statistical error.. Parent comment

Re:50% of neuroscience papers suffer from a major statistica... by onemoreact on Monday November 28, 2011 @09:47AM (#3286045)
The best and simplest approach IMO would be improving peer review. If it was understood that scientific journals would reject papers with poor statistical analysis you would see changes fairly rapidly.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:50% of neuroscience papers suffer from a major statistica... by carbocation on Monday November 28, 2011 @10:36AM (#3286235)
Nature and the NEJM, and possibly others, assign statistical reviewers. So this is a known problem that some high profile journals are attempting to correct.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:50% of neuroscience papers suffer from a major statistica... by markkat on Monday November 28, 2011 @10:06AM (#3286110)
Yes, but I think one of the problems is that the reviewers can't sufficiently judge statistics. It is peer-review, after all. I've had some reviewers ask some questions that indicated that they didn't really understand the t-test.
[ Parent | on HN ]