[HNJohnC]

"We tested two adult samples using two different sequence learning tasks."

Two? Nothing to see here.

[wdewind]

This attitude is not helpful and actively damaging. Small sample sizes in science do serve a purpose: to get larger studies funded.

It's as if the top comment to every ShowHN post was: "Not at $200mm in funding. Nothing to see here."

[HNJohnC]

Actively damaging? A little dramatic perhaps? I didn't say it doesn't serve a purpose, I said there is nothing to see here. Quite literally. Until they do a larger study why is it news?

[briandh]

Two samples, not two subjects. Still not definitive, but definitely "something to see" if their methodology holds up (I don't have access).

[sangfroid]

I just got a copy of the paper from the researcher. They used 16 study participants. Still not a huge sample size, but big enough for consideration.

[bayesianhorse]

I think they mean two different studies, not two subjects.