The article itself talks about this self-selection/sampling bias due to a minuscule sample size of 813 people. Reducing “science community” to such a small sample is not convincing.
Self-selections, sure, that's a risk with any and all surveys and questionnaires, which must be mentioned.
But 813? Why wouldn't that be enough? Basic stats puts that at a very healthy number for most questions, and the researchers don't raise any questions about bias about the number.
But 813? Why wouldn't that be enough? Basic stats puts that at a very healthy number for most questions, and the researchers don't raise any questions about bias about the number.