Session: 1234567891011121314151617         Page 102103104105106107108109110111112113114115116117118119120121122123124125126127128129130131132133134135136137138139 of 755

Yes.

Sure. If you think of a device that would have a big roll of paper in the mechanism some place, and had ten or fifty needles that could be activated by pressing buttons around the table. The buttons were wired to the machine so that you sat and held a red button in one hand and a green button in the other. If you liked something you pressed the green button, if you disliked it you pressed the red button, if you were indifferent you didn't press either one. And then on that piece of paper there, each one of those needles connected to our particular -- or to the subject's response buttons, would record on a line either plus or minus or nothing or indifferent. And that tape moved at a steady rate so that you could calculate time by putting down a measuring device as you stretch -- When the program was over, you would stretch out the tape and put down a ruler or a measuring device, and say, At one minute and thirteen seconds into the program, you switched from liking it to disliking it. You had the script right in front of you, you'd say in the interview, what caused you to go one way or the other at that point, so you could begin to find out why they liked and didn't like a particular part of the program. The device was just that. There was no magic in the recording mechanism. The magic was that it gave you a location as to where there was a shift in opinion. And the interviewing skill was the important part. The interviewer had something that he could look at and say to the man off the street who came in to participate, frequently not articulate as to what they liked and didn't like, you could go back and say, “Well, at this point, this happened. Why did you change?” “Well, I didn't like the announcer.”

Oh, I see.