Welcome to the Gallery – a place where you'll find hope and strength through the healing power of art and the universal reach of technology –
a place where you can
Connect, Create, and Thrive!
Interested in partnering with us?
Click here to find out how!
Displaying (2) Comments | Comment on this piece | Report objectionable art
. I just saw enough crap to know Ryan was being dumb. Yeah there was some silly stuff where McI and Ryan were tirnyg to blame issues on their paper with a direction they think ES steered it. I fastened on that quickly as did you and ES, and of course it is sill, those guys are responsible for their published work, not the reviewer. McI has a bad habit of that sillines with previous papers. I think a lot of the issue comes from them being so disorganized in blog writing and then sending in review drafts that are a mash of different variables in a non full factorial manner. They just don't think clearly in terms of disaggregation in their analyses. I saw it, but there's only so many hours in the day, did not bother nailing it.Other guy: It's been discussed a lot. Start with the 2005 Huybers comment on McI's 2005 paper. It's a very easy read and H even shows the formula so you can see how McI changed two paramaters at once (but did not report a full factorial). No OFAT. No full factorial. Just two equations with three unknowns (two independ variables, and one dependent).
By: | Jul 09, 2012 | Report Comment
Deadly accraute answer. You've hit the bullseye!
By: | Dec 31, 2011 | Report Comment
Jan_23_no_01
mzabor
There are 365 pieces of art in this thread
