Posted by medlib on October 28, 2001, at 2:23:02
Dr. Bob--
I found your new registration process considerably more trouble than consenting to major surgery and slightly less time-consuming than buying a new house. If your goal (beyond legal CYA) was to limit Babble participation to those with above-average patience, persistence and commitment-to-contributing, I'd say that you're right on target. That's certainly a legitimate aim; smaller definitely is a different experience.
However, had I had to deal with this obstacle course 2 years ago, I wouldn't have been one of the participants. I'd have "bailed" before I even *got* to the quiz--too many steps for something I wasn't sure I could, or wanted, to do in the first place.
My concern is that this quiz may be a "straw that breaks" for too many potential participants. Of course, *any* quiz may have that effect. But this one has an academic-qualifying flavor that, if you find it difficult, is inhibiting--and, if you don't, is just very annoying. (Either way, the tempting response is, "Forget this!") What it *isn't*, is either educational or supportive.
If some sort of quiz is a research sine qua non, a more user-friendly one would (IMHO) feature no more than 5 Qs, reiterate important points in some of the Qs, be mostly fill-in-the-blank, supply or approve answers Q by Q, and end with a consent option. The focus of this feature would then shift from proving competence to reinforcing information, but I think that the comprehension end point wouldn't be much different.
I hope that this is "much ado about nothing." A counter on the first registration page to compare "hits" against registrations might be interesting, tho.
medlib
poster:medlib
thread:2237
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20010718/msgs/2237.html