[ WP ] A mad scientist is trying to get his work peer reviewed , but his unorthodox lab practices are raising a few issues .

Peer Review Report: Dr. Ian K. Hassendre, *On the Appeal of Adorable Animals* 
 
 By Dr. S. Holmes 
 
 & nbsp; 
 
 The research done by Dr. Hassendre has been interesting in allowing us to have a new way to understand why humans as a species are drawn to what most consider to be `` adorable'' and `` cute'', how it gives humans an evolutionary advantage and the implication of this trait to our species. He provided detailed analysis on human reaction and gives a very thorough explanation on his methods. 
 
 That said, his methods are unorthodox and somewhat unprofessional. First up, his test pool consists on only one individual, a Ms. Kelly Hassendre, age 6 as of 21 January 2001. Secondly, despite how sound his research is, his journal ( attached as Appendix A ) contains highly subjective elements which is deemed to be unprofessional. Below is an excerpt from his journal: 
 
 & nbsp; 
 
 *20 January 2001* 
 
 *Kelly seems to like the pink plump unicorn doll far more than the chemistry set I bought her. I never understand what that girl is thinking. Hmm, what is the appeal of these cuddly things anyway? I really hope she'll be careful and not try to have a tea party with the chemistry set though, better warn her first! * 
 
 & nbsp; 
 
 As such, due to the small test sample size, unprofessional behavior and unscientific practices, we have to reject his submission. I hope that he will be more objective and less emotional in his work to produce works fitting for a scientist, and not let his personal issues affect the quality of his output.
