Independent scientific judgment

Know whether the science can bear the weight of the decision.

I help investors, founders, institutions, and decision-makers evaluate science-heavy claims before they commit capital, credibility, or organizational support.

40+ peer-reviewed articlesAcross cognitive science, neuroscience, aging, and experience-related neuroplasticity
Published in leading journalsIncluding PNAS, NeuroImage, Cognition, and Developmental Science
Methodological depthBehavioral science, EEG/ERP, neuroimaging, multivariate analysis, and evidence synthesis
Independent research leadershipCo-Founder and Executive Director, ERN Institute; Founding Editor-in-Chief, JERN
Best-fit domains

Deepest value where the claim depends on cognition, the brain, or behavior.

I can review work outside these areas when the core question is methodological, but these are the domains in which my scientific background is most directly relevant.

Neurotechnology
Cognitive assessment
Brain health and aging
Learning and language
Behavioral and digital products
Research methods and evidence claims
What clients can buy

Clear products, matched to the size of the decision.

Start with one claim, one call, or a full evidence package. Every written engagement is fixed-fee and scoped in advance.

01

Focused Claim Review

For one paper, claim, deck section, or clearly bounded scientific question. The review identifies what is supported, what is not, and why it matters.

From $1,250 USDUsually delivered within 5 business days

See the focused review
03

Full Scientific Diligence

For high-stakes decisions involving multiple claims, a larger literature, or substantial uncertainty about translation and failure modes.

From $5,000 USDUsually delivered within 2 to 3 weeks

See full diligence
Low-friction starting point

Scientific Advisory Call

A 60-minute discussion with limited advance review and a brief written summary. The $450 USD fee is credited toward a written review started within 7 days.

Request a $450 advisory call
The standard

Not a persuasive narrative. A defensible analysis.

The review explicitly separates established findings, inference, assumption, uncertainty, and speculation. Weaknesses are stated directly, without manufacturing certainty where the evidence does not support it.

Simple process

From materials to a usable decision memo.

Send the question and materials

Explain what is being evaluated, what decision it informs, and what evidence is currently available.

Confirm scope and fixed fee

I identify the appropriate depth, exclusions, timeline, and deliverable before work begins.

Receive the written review

The memo prioritizes decision-relevant strengths, limitations, uncertainty, and implications.

Optional debrief

A focused discussion can clarify findings and the questions that should be asked next.

Before you engage

See exactly how I review evidence and the scientific expertise behind that work.

Read a sample decision memo and selected publications that document the methods and subject areas I use in client reviews.

Sample scientific review memo

See how a client-facing memo states what the evidence supports, what it does not establish, which risks matter, and what evidence would change the conclusion.

View the sample review

Selected publications

See the published work behind my experience in clinical neuroimaging, cognitive aging, evidence synthesis, measurement, EEG and ERP, and applied human factors.

View publications and relevance
Start with the decision

Send the claim, the materials, and what is at stake.

I will tell you quickly whether the question is a fit and which service level is appropriate.

Contact John