View Single Post
Old 12-24-2014, 12:43 PM   #8
robko
Wizard
robko ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.robko ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.robko ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.robko ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.robko ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.robko ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.robko ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.robko ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.robko ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.robko ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.robko ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
Posts: 2,454
Karma: 5469320
Join Date: Jul 2010
Device: Kobo
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shades View Post
Dr. Czeisler sure has a lot of publishers to his name up there. He received funding from them and I doubt it was to write a book, or not only to write a book. Pretty blatant conflict of interest.

Besides this, the extremely low amount of people participating in this so called study is laughable and invalidates any findings really. You need a lot more than a dozen, give or take participants for an actual study.
I'm not disagreeing that this is really flimsy data to make the conclusions based on, but near as I can see he has 2 publishers in that list ("Penguin Press/Houghton Mifflin Harcourt" and "McGraw Hill"). If he specifically got funding from the publishers for this article, then that definitely is a conflict. I'm just saying that what this says is he got ROYALTIES (which makes me think book sales) not FUNDING which in my mind are 2 totally different things. So throw this research under the bus for the small sample size and possibly questionable methodology, not the funding thing.
robko is offline   Reply With Quote