In the methods section, authors forgot to mention whether and how did they evaluate correlations. Also in table 3, authors give t-values and and p-values. Quite interestingly, a t-value of 9.96 was given a p-value of 0.59. I am unable to understand it, may be someone can help me. And this is not just one p-value, there are many such errors in the table. Now, either t-values are incorrect or p-values are incorrect. Surprisingly, how did such an obvious error escaped the review and editorial process.
Posted by: rqayyum - Aug 2005