[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Heartlogic-dev] Re: fine tuning
From: |
William L. Jarrold |
Subject: |
[Heartlogic-dev] Re: fine tuning |
Date: |
Thu, 29 Jan 2004 11:06:00 -0600 (CST) |
Wow. Thanks.
On Thu, 29 Jan 2004, Joshua N Pritikin wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 29, 2004 at 01:17:04AM -0600, William L. Jarrold wrote:
> > A quick random thought...Hrm, I intuitively think 8 clicks might
> > be too many.
> >
> > One thing I think we should get rid of for the initial stages is asking
> > them for diagnosis. 1) it might scare people 2) it wasn't part of the
> > original dissertation study so, why should it be now?...But, yes, longer
> > term we will definitely want this info, or info like it....E.g. we might
> > want their scale on the Gilliam Autism Scale, but this is an issue for
> > much later. But my suspicion is that we will have a devil of a time
> > getting the, shoot, I think it is 90 subjects minimum we need. (10 per
> > group, 9 groups, i think).
>
> I am quick to agree.
>
> Fixed.
>
> New experts are no longer presented with the diagnostic page.
>
> --
> A new cognitive theory of emotion, http://openheartlogic.org
>
[Heartlogic-dev] researchy intro (was Re: DSM & Study #2 Introduction), Joshua N Pritikin, 2004/01/24
[Heartlogic-dev] Re: researchy intro (was Re: DSM & Study #2 Introduction), William L. Jarrold, 2004/01/29