'Mike' wrote:
"Mike Lyle" wrote in message
.. .
My apologies for the OTness, but I hope I'm a familiar enough urgler
for people to judge that this isn't spam.
[...]

Yes we know you sufficiently to assist, well I am anyway:-), but can
we know what it is about before we 'plunge in' please.
[...]

That's very kind: one of the problems the youngsters have with this kind
of thing is getting enough independent participants. But I'm afraid
that, as I'm one of the guinea pigs, it might tend to invalidate the
experiment if I knew what it was about!* My guess is probably much the
same as yours: I imagine he's hoping to compare people's results on one
kind of test with those on another, and see if there's any difference
which can be correlated with other known factors. The task may be to
compare two differing schools of thought; but I really have no idea.

What I _do_ know is that I be not near so good at these 'ere tests nor I
were fifty year ago!

To Martin: yes, I spotted a typo, too; but I can't remember where it
was.

*I volunteered, for money, as a guinea pig at Birkbeck once. We were
subjected by a succession of graduate students to a battery of tests in
ascending order of weirdness, and it wasn't till afterwards that we
realised we'd been tested not on the activities themselves, but on our
reactions to being set impossible tasks! At least this one isn't like
that.

--
Mike.



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com