Abstract: | In reply to Buchwald's (see record 1978-21210-001) critique of Wener and Rehm (see record 1975-25511-001), it is argued that the alternative hypotheses he offers are not compelling and the artifact he identifies is not of sufficient magnitude to have been solely responsible for the results of the reanalysis. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved) |