2009
DOI: 10.1016/s1053-8119(09)71202-9
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Neural correlates of interspecies perspective taking in the post-mortem Atlantic Salmon: an argument for multiple comparisons correction

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
212
0
7

Year Published

2011
2011
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
5
4
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 333 publications
(221 citation statements)
references
References 16 publications
2
212
0
7
Order By: Relevance
“…false positive) rate (Kilner, 2013). This practice has similarities to problems highlighted in the fMRI literature of double dipping (Kriegeskorte, Simmons, Bellgowan, & Baker, 2009) and failure to appropriately correct for multiple comparisons (Bennett, Miller, & Wolford, 2009). One way to guard against inflating the Type I error rate is to select window placements from prior literature.…”
Section: Figure Captionsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…false positive) rate (Kilner, 2013). This practice has similarities to problems highlighted in the fMRI literature of double dipping (Kriegeskorte, Simmons, Bellgowan, & Baker, 2009) and failure to appropriately correct for multiple comparisons (Bennett, Miller, & Wolford, 2009). One way to guard against inflating the Type I error rate is to select window placements from prior literature.…”
Section: Figure Captionsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Over a decade later, and one "Voodoo correlations" (Vul et al, 2009) imbroglio and postmortem ichthyological fMRI study (Bennett et al, 2011) later, it seems everyone agrees that (a) correcting inferences for the search over the brain is essential and (b) such corrections are not consistently utilized in fMRI. Hopefully some historical perspective can strengthen the discipline's resolve to uphold good statistical practice.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Granted, as the infamous Bdead salmon^study (Bennett, Miller, & Wolford, 2009) showed quite comically and persuasively, data from neuroscience studies can lead to wildly different conclusions if not analyzed properly. These issues of replication and reality in neuroscience research continue, whether they involve fMRI studies (Eklund, Nichols, & Knutsson, 2016), tDCS (Vannorsdall et al, 2016), or other technologies.…”
Section: In This Issuementioning
confidence: 99%