Research by Haynes and others used fMRI scans to attempt to spot brain differences as people (3 males and 5 females, aged 21-35) decided whether to add or subtract two numbers. Haynes et al. reported they could do so with 70% accuracy. The media report is entitled, "The brain scan that can read people's intentions." It goes on to discuss the ethical ramifications of being able to decide who is and is not intending to commit a crime. (Reading the media report is not required, but if you'd like more information, the link is here: http://www.theguardian.com/science/2007/feb/09/neuroscience.ethicsofscienceLinks to an external site..)

Discuss the following points in relation to this example:

1. Discuss the generalization of research results from one population to another and generalization from a sample size of 8.
2. Identify the dependent variable in the two reports.
3. Explain (don't merely restate) the need to replicate a study's research findings before assuming the results are true.
4. Explain how this study would need to be conducted differently to lead to the conclusions stated by the media.
5. If you were a science journalist, how would you restate the research results to be more accurate?