I have some statistics training and still use it from time to time in my job. What bothers me most about the article is that they mention terms like "statisitical power", "statistically significant', etc. yet they provide no degrees of freedom or probability values for their tests. In the field that I work, there's a standard convention for reporting statisitical results. Anytime you mention the word "significant" in a scientific paper, you should cite your results in some manner. I think any journal editor in my field would have torn this paper up simply on that alone.
Lawrence
|