“That’s right folks – the key behavioral interaction of the paper – is non-significant. Measly. Minuscule.
Forget about p-values for a second and consider the gall it takes to not only completely skim over this fact (nowhere in the paper is it mentioned) and head right to the delicious t-tests, but to egregiously promote this ‘finding’ in the title, abstract, and discussion as showing evidence for an effect of nature on rumination!
No correlations with the (non-significant) behavior. Just pure and simple reverse inference piled on top of fallacious interpretation of a non-significant interaction.”
http://www.pnas.org/content/112/28/8567.full “Nature experience reduces rumination and subgenual prefrontal cortex activation”
Or so i’m going to claim because science is basically about making up whatever qualitative opinion you like and hard-selling it to a high impact journal right? Last night a paper appeared in PNAS early access entitled “Nature experience reduces rumination and subgenual prefrontal cortex activation” as a contributed submission. Like many of you I immediately felt my neurocringe brain area explode with activity as I began to smell the sickly sweet scent of gimmickry. Now I don’t have a lot of time so I was worried I wouldn’t be able to cover this paper in any detail. But never to worry, because the entire paper is literally two ANOVAs!
The paper begins with a lofty appeal to our naturalistic sensibilities; we’re increasingly living in urban areas, this trend is associated with…
View original post 821 more words