The subjects' brain activity was recorded using an electroencephalogram (EEG) while they made judgments about the individuals. Fast, involuntary brain responses can be distinguished here from slower, more controlled responses. The researchers had expected the latter to involve consideration of the source's credibility in addition to emotion, and thus that credibility might factor into people’s judgments, whereas emotion should dominate in early and more involuntary responses. However, both late and early brain responses showed dominant influences of headline emotionality independent of credibility.
In the spirit of being critical even when we want to agree with or believe the conclusion: how "good" are these EEG studies?
I recall some scandal several years ago in which fMRI data was being promoted as far more useful than it really was, due to some buggy clustering software and maybe also p-hacking.
Are these types of results generally reproducible? How do we know they are valid?
> Are these types of results generally reproducible? How do we know they are valid?
It's a new study, so no-one had the opportunity to reproduce their findings yet. Generally in the scientific community, one tries to find the flaw in their argument/methods, rather then presuming them to be faulty.
It doesn't seem like a very complicated, time consuming or costly experiment (compared with e.g. the search for the higgs boson), so I'd think it's reasonable to expect another team to reproduce the results in the near future, if there is sufficient interest.
I mentioned the search for the higgs boson only as it leaves me uneasy, that it was so expensive, that I doubt in my lifetime any team will attempt to reproduce the results.
In the spirit of being critical even when we want to agree with or believe the conclusion: how "good" are these EEG studies?
I recall some scandal several years ago in which fMRI data was being promoted as far more useful than it really was, due to some buggy clustering software and maybe also p-hacking.
Are these types of results generally reproducible? How do we know they are valid?