What we hold ourselves to
This is the credibility page. It is meant to be sober.
Hypotheses and analysis plans archived before data collection.
Condition concealed from participants, administrators, and analysts until unblinding.
Results consistent with chance are published with equal prominence.
Designed to detect a pre-specified minimum effect; underpowered claims are not made.
We measure whether an effect exists before claiming why. We do not borrow physics terminology — such as energy, fields, or mechanics — as explanation. Where there is no accepted mechanism, we say so, and test the effect anyway.
Raw data hashed and de-identified; chain of custody documented. No medical or diagnostic claims.
Informed consent; an ethics-review path; data handled to a special-category standard.
Methods, data, and analysis code released at each milestone; conflicts and funding disclosed in full; no reviewer compensated on outcomes.
Ashta does not maintain a narrative that results must support. We use plain language — "consistent with chance", "did not survive correction", "interesting, not conclusive", "treated as hypothesis-generating". A clear null at adequate power is a successful execution of the design, not a failure.
