Impression management in research reporting: When effects are not really as pronounced as claimed

I would like to express several concerns about a paper recently published in PNAS (1). My focus is on the matter of “impression management,” the extent to which the narrative of any paper is appropriately cautious about the true significance of the findings being reported and that there is no evidence of ambiguity or potential for misunderstanding. A set of guidelines concerning this issue has recently been published (2). Unfortunately, this paper contains several examples that illustrate the need for such guidelines.