Criticisms non fatal offences essay

It’s painful to see junk science — and make no mistake — this is junk with a dose of scientism added. The lack of rigor is appalling. Even more appalling is to think that this got past a set of peer reviewers. The sampling procedure for the six studies is pure junk. The appropriate sampling pool would be persons living in hurricane corridors. But getting that sample would require hard work. The authors instead used convenience samples that are worthless. Taking the easy out on the sampling sends a clear signal that the authors are interested in the appearance of rigor, but not the application of rigor.

Criticisms non fatal offences essay

criticisms non fatal offences essay

Media:

criticisms non fatal offences essaycriticisms non fatal offences essaycriticisms non fatal offences essaycriticisms non fatal offences essay