n=12, n=27 etc. nearly useless.
You know that Eyferth study of mixed Black conscripts and German mothers everybody cites? Has 10 direct citations?!? Suspicious!pic.twitter.com/CAeYVVw9ph
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
I think Eyferth published several papers on the sample, plus a book. Would be interesting to compare the originals to secondary sources.
-
I think this is the book: https://www.amazon.de/Farbige-Kinder-Deutschland-Klaus-Eyferth/dp/B0000BHWB9 …
-
Already trying to order a copy.
-
Did you get your hands on Eyferth (1961), Archiv für die gesamte Psychologie? https://scholar.google.com/scholar?cites=8537679728338764227&as_sdt=2005&sciodt=0,5&hl=en … That seems be commonly cited.
-
Ordered a German to get them all and read. He can't stop now. Befahl ist Befahl.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
What does this imply in your opinion? It does seem weird given that the study has a Wikipedia article....
-
Not sure yet. Paper data table does not match popular presentation either.pic.twitter.com/QsvHHtccp1
-
do you have a PDF? I've never found one.
-
The journal changed name. If you search for the new one, it will be there. Then use scihub.
-
what's the journal name?
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
A common phenomenon, sadly. Language probably a factor in this case.
-
There's another example of this: Jensen's 1969 article. The citation mostly used is incorrect and originated in Gould's book. :P
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
There's a paper in this, somewhere.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
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.