>Nate Hall writes:
>
>>It already sounds more easy to accomplish than mine and yields more
>>data. I like it!
>
>I like it too! But it'll never pass the Wade Test. There are far to many
>variables that you just don't account for. Unfortunately rigor is seldom
>easy.
>
>It also has the weak point of having to rely on peoples memory of past
>events, as opposed to an actual black-and-CRT-green records of their
>behaviors. This problem already `cropped' up in the early diffusion
studies
>and has since been seen as a factor to try to avoid if at all possible in
>any new studies.
>
>-Prof.Tim
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>