Talk:Abel screening

Can someone make this flow better? Rez (The Administrators - anonym) 00:44, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

"Further, there was no evidence indicating that the study itself had been rigorously examined (for instance, through the process of peer review) and nothing to show "the significance of a subject viewing slides of children for one-third as long as [the study subject] viewed slides of adults" -- the "fail" score that Abel derived from the study."[1]

Does this mean that viewing children and adults for equal lengths won't work? Jillium 04:50, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

From what I have heard about the test, it looks as if this is a typing error. Significance would mean +1/3 on child stimuli. The Admins 21:13, 13 June 2009 (UTC)