Talking to a basic scientist about Registered Reports today. ‘It doesn’t work for basic science’ he said. ‘We get our data, *then* work out what story we can tell to get us into Nature’. No idea there might be anything wrong with that.
-
-
Because there are none. At least, none grounded in any meaningful power analysis or sample size calculation. The justification is usually “this is what we could afford in the budget while doing all the stuff we wanted”
-
Surely that's unethical. I mean, you have to euthanize the animals after the study, if you're not getting meaningful results you're just killing rats for no reason
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
The new editorial policies for NPG seems to have pushed the number of studies reporting a priori sample size estimates for their in vivo studies to 15 %. It's still super low, but it's at least something. Source:https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/187245v1 …
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.

