#### p < 0.05 ???

'Research that produces novel results, statistically significant results (that is, typically p < 0.05)"

This is 2*sigma significance level, right? This is what, in my rather unscientific observations, people in medical professions seem to consider "statistically significant". I am a physicist by education, and I jump every time I read a medical paper. I don't do it often, mind you, but *all* I have read presented 2*sigma level results as significant. A few had footnotes describing a process whereby a committee approves the methodology, including sample sizes, designed to expect a 2*sigma level result (larger studies are presumably too expensive/long/whatever - and are deemed unnecessary).

Sorry, a 5% chance of getting the expected result by chance, while assuming normal (i.e., dropping very quickly indeed) error distribution, is NOT statistically significant. Even 3*sigma level (for p < 0.0027) isn't. Try a few orders of magnitude better (in terms of p value) for real science.

Many years ago I taught physics lab at a university. The physics was not very sophisticated, but it taught students to gather and analyse data. Just about every science or engineering student passed through it. Medical students were conspicuous by their absence - I suppose they were too busy with other things to learn. I guess those students now write scientific papers.

Some neuroscientists are probably not physicians. They should know better than sticking to 2*sigma then.