The problem of pseudoreplication in neuroscientific studies: is it affecting your analysis?

Excerpts

Of the nineteen papers published in the August 2008 issue of Nature Neuroscience, seventeen papers (89%) used inferential statistics; of these, only three (18%) had sufficient information to assess whether there was pseudoreplication. Of these three, two appeared to have pseudoreplication. Of the fourteen papers that used inferential statistics but did not provide sufficient information, five (36%) were suspected of having pseudoreplication, but it was not possible to determine for certain.

Reference

Stanley E Lazic “The problem of pseudoreplication in neuroscientific studies: is it affecting your analysis?" (2010) DOI: 10.1186/1471-2202-11-5

@Article{lazic2010,
  title = {The problem of pseudoreplication in neuroscientific studies: is it affecting your analysis?},
  volume = {11},
  issn = {1471-2202},
  url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2202-11-5},
  doi = {10.1186/1471-2202-11-5},
  number = {1},
  journal = {BMC Neuroscience},
  publisher = {Springer Science and Business Media LLC},
  author = {Lazic, Stanley E},
  year = {2010},
  month = {jan}
}