Van Gijn J, Bonke B
J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 1977 Aug;40(8):787-9. doi: 10.1136/jnnp.40.8.787.
Twenty neurologists were asked to judge a number of plantar responses on film. Each film was preceded by a slide with a fictitious abstract of history and examination (minus the plantar reflex). The main part of the presentation only served to disguise the fact that two films, both showing equivocal toe movements, were presented twice at the same sitting, but with opposing information as to the probability of a Babinski sign. Interpretation of these identical pictures differed significantly (P less than 0.01), conforming to the information given. Thirty other neurologists who rated the films without previous data showed no such change of opinion.
二十位神经科医生被要求对一些足底反射的影片进行判断。每部影片之前都有一张幻灯片，上面有虚构的病史和检查摘要（不包括足底反射）。展示的主要部分只是为了掩盖这样一个事实：两部都显示模棱两可的脚趾运动的影片在同一次会议上被播放了两次，但关于巴宾斯基征可能性的信息却是相反的。对这些相同图片的解读存在显著差异（P小于0.01），符合所给出的信息。另外三十位没有看过之前数据就对影片进行评分的神经科医生则没有出现这种观点的变化。
