Tye vs. Chaudhury

I read the papers being previously aware of the contradictory results in the back of my mind and I wasn’t exactly surprised by them nor was I swayed in either direction. I’ve always been of the belief that if you try hard enough, you can find evidence to back up whatever it is you want to prove. That being said, I had a hard time picking between the two papers, as I felt naturally inclined to sort of declare a winner based on the contradictory nature of them. Although they arrive at different conclusions even though they essentially are asking the same question, I think both Tye and Chaudhury could both be presenting reasonable results that could be further investigated and could both be proven true or at least further supported. 

There were no red flags in either paper that dissuaded me from either one so I was left being at peace with both conclusions. My one point of dissonance was that the differences in the stress induced by the CMS paradigm as opposed to the SDP paradigm could possibly play a role in the opposing results. The CMS seems less intense than the SDP to me and I think the effects may be mediated by the differences in the tests. 

It was a lot easier for me to agree or disagree with a paper last week but I couldn’t really do that with these papers and I don’t know if that is a testament to the good quality of both papers or just me not fully grasping the details. I assume, after further discussion tomorrow, I will probably arrive at a better conclusion.