두 논문 비교
결론이 반대인 두 논문. 방법 때문인지, 표본 때문인지, 주장 때문인지 보세요.
Two studies on the same question reaching opposite conclusions is common, and the useful response is not to pick the one you prefer. The disagreement almost always has a locatable source: a different population, a different operationalisation of the outcome, a different analysis choice, or a sample size that made one of them underpowered. Putting the two side by side on design, sample and finding usually shows which it was within a few minutes, and the answer matters — a disagreement explained by population is a boundary condition worth writing about, while one explained by power is just noise.
What usually explains contradictory findings?
Different populations, different outcome measures, different analysis choices, or one study being underpowered. Rarely is one simply wrong.
Should I cite both papers?
Usually yes, with the explanation of why they differ. That explanation is often a contribution in itself.
How do I tell a real disagreement from a false one?
Check whether they measured the same construct. Studies that disagree frequently turn out to have been measuring different things.