- Pretesting second participant.
- Things seem to be generally going in the right direction, but I have concerns about the validity of the P(Theory) judgments. Two 100s is a serious problem.
- This person gave 100% for both P(theory) judgments. I don't know how to explain this.
- Original theory (stable prices due to excess supply) was retained with an exception note (better coal producing technology). Consistent with the default/exception approach of HHNT and Khemlani group.
- Person gave 100% confidence both times, a serious problem. Why would the person do this?
- Person gave slowly increasing coal prices, but said they are steady. Again, this seems like an inflation argument.
- Person did not make predictions.
- Wordiness, especially "perception of energy prices"
- Didn't understand inflation note.
- Delete for 6 different years.
- The similarity of explanation one to the original data was also not valid. The theory said no change, but the person said this was similar to the downward price trend.
- Removed "perception of energy prices" from introduction.
- Deleted "for 6 different years"
- Fix inflation note to: "the prices have already been adjusted for inflation" from "these are real coal prices, meaning the prices have been adjusted for inflation"