Ironing out the statistical wrinkles in "ten ironic rules"

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

The article "Ten ironic rules for non-statistical reviewers" (Friston, 2012) shares some commonly heard frustrations about the peer-review process that all researchers can identify with. Though we found the article amusing, we have some concerns about its description of a number of statistical issues. In this commentary we address these issues, as well as the premise of the article.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)499-502
Number of pages4
JournalNeuroImage
Volume81
DOIs
StatePublished - Nov 1 2013

Fingerprint

Peer Review
Frustration
Research Personnel

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Cognitive Neuroscience
  • Neurology
  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

Ironing out the statistical wrinkles in "ten ironic rules". / Lindquist, Martin; Caffo, Brian S; Crainiceanu, Ciprian M.

In: NeuroImage, Vol. 81, 01.11.2013, p. 499-502.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{ec5a01cc5506420c89d4461f12c6d481,
title = "Ironing out the statistical wrinkles in {"}ten ironic rules{"}",
abstract = "The article {"}Ten ironic rules for non-statistical reviewers{"} (Friston, 2012) shares some commonly heard frustrations about the peer-review process that all researchers can identify with. Though we found the article amusing, we have some concerns about its description of a number of statistical issues. In this commentary we address these issues, as well as the premise of the article.",
author = "Martin Lindquist and Caffo, {Brian S} and Crainiceanu, {Ciprian M}",
year = "2013",
month = "11",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.neuroimage.2013.02.056",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "81",
pages = "499--502",
journal = "NeuroImage",
issn = "1053-8119",
publisher = "Academic Press Inc.",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Ironing out the statistical wrinkles in "ten ironic rules"

AU - Lindquist, Martin

AU - Caffo, Brian S

AU - Crainiceanu, Ciprian M

PY - 2013/11/1

Y1 - 2013/11/1

N2 - The article "Ten ironic rules for non-statistical reviewers" (Friston, 2012) shares some commonly heard frustrations about the peer-review process that all researchers can identify with. Though we found the article amusing, we have some concerns about its description of a number of statistical issues. In this commentary we address these issues, as well as the premise of the article.

AB - The article "Ten ironic rules for non-statistical reviewers" (Friston, 2012) shares some commonly heard frustrations about the peer-review process that all researchers can identify with. Though we found the article amusing, we have some concerns about its description of a number of statistical issues. In this commentary we address these issues, as well as the premise of the article.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84880812523&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84880812523&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2013.02.056

DO - 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2013.02.056

M3 - Article

C2 - 23587691

AN - SCOPUS:84880812523

VL - 81

SP - 499

EP - 502

JO - NeuroImage

JF - NeuroImage

SN - 1053-8119

ER -