I feel like there are a lot of assumptions in this paper*. (Also, wtf, with the not reporting any n or actual differences between things.) Honestly, what I really want to know is why J Soc Clin Psychol is accepting this peer-reviewed without poking for better numbers and more talk about limitations in the discussion section.
*Based on your analysis. I don't have the spoons for reading it straight right now.
no subject
*Based on your analysis. I don't have the spoons for reading it straight right now.