On Mon, 18 Apr 2005, Joshua N Pritikin wrote:
On Fri, 2005-04-15 at 01:50 -0500, William L. Jarrold wrote:See espec dicussion section of chapter about study 3. also conclusion chapter, maybe also disucssion section of chapter about study 2. think about how to use a flowchart to answer some of the explanations of those items that did not live up to hypothesis
I re-read those parts just now. The discussion of comments is mostly confined to study #2. What I found in study #3 is a lot of discussion of the fine points of the statistics and associated guesswork about the cause of the inconsistent results.
I did not find a proposal for the kind of flow-chart study which I want to do.
right. i did not expect you to. but methinks that some of the associated guesswork could be answered with a flowchart like study. worst case, i'll dust off the diss and re-read my guesswork and then showya what i mean by using flowschart study.
but first, b4 walking, i must crawl and do the $)(*(*&! replication. stay tuned.
bill
-- If you are an American then support http://fairtax.org (Permanently replace 50,000+ pages of tax law with about 200 pages.)
_______________________________________________ Heartlogic-dev mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/heartlogic-dev
