August 4, 2020
As I read more and more articles about a single subject (functional lateralization in this case) it feels like I’m falling into a rabbit hole. So much controversy among different researches emerge and it’s just too much for me to handle.
I’m currently searching for various studies on the assessment of resting state functional connectivity of any kind. Between two different methods of analysis, one of them seems like total gibberish according to the other and vice versa. But since both of them are published on highly acclaimed journals and numerously cited, calling either one of them ‘gibberish’ seems quite imprudent.
Then what should I do? Cherry-pick only the researches that support my claims? I used to think cherry-picking is the last thing a researcher should do, but it just seems like there is no other choice. Not only if I come up with a grand unified theory for every single thing I do research on, cherrypicking seems pretty much inevitable.
I’m not quite sure of anything right now. All I’m sure of is that if I keep digging for more rabbit holes, I’ll never finish my paper in time. I should just stop thinking too deep and start writing….. If that’s even possible.