......actually, there's a whole lot wrong with this "in press, uncorrected proof" journal paper from Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, but arguably the biggest problem in it is the way that the authors discussed Daniel Tammet.
Nicolas Rothen, Beat Meier and Jamie Ward (2012) Enhanced memory ability: Insights from synaesthesia.
Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews. Received 19 February 2012. Revised 7 May 2012. Accepted 15 May 2012. Available online 23 May 2012. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2012.05.004
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0149763412000760
It appears that I was not the first to notice this recent inexcusable blunder by three supposed scientists (see post number 95)
http://mnemotechnics.org/x/forums/daniel-tammet-840.html
Please, please, please, Dr Nicolas Rothen, Dr Beat Meier and Dr Jamie Ward, correct your uncorrected proof! I suggest that you might start by actually reading all of the studies that you have discussed in this paper.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment