Wrote Scientific Reports February 8 2024 that a newly published meta-analysis on mindfulness & brain morphology excluded all null-findings and therefore ... by definition found a relationship.
Still no proper response from the journal (other then many "we'll look into it"). It's been a year now.
Still no proper response from the journal (other then many "we'll look into it"). It's been a year now.
Comments
https://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/185507/what-happens-if-the-explanatory-and-response-variables-are-sorted-independently
https://eiko-fried.com/antidotes-to-cynicism-creep/
But something tells me 1) there is publication bias and 2) the authors would consider negative findings to be null as well.
1. Some thorough careful preregistered large scale studies with high power. Null findings.
2. Mostly tiny sample p hacked positive findings.
Meta analysis of all studies is null and shows pub bias.
Meta analysis excluding null finding is positive.
(Discussed in detail in https://eiko-fried.com/antidotes-to-cynicism-creep/)