- Edited
async I understand your stance.
However, also try to understand me. The data-points you try to gather are pretty late in the chain of information
If the previous data-points are not assessed, it becomes a pointless exercise, because it will be hugely biased.
We shall not end up in wrong conclusions.
Let me explain in this hypothetical situation:
1. I eat toast from the brand foo.
2. After 6 years, I notice that my throat itches when I eat that particular toast
3. <=== Now you start Interviewing ===>
4. You ask me if it was the first time I ate that particular toast
5. I say no, I ate it for 6 years
6. You ask me if I ever tried a whole grain toast
Do you see the issue?
- We need to make sure the ingredients stayed consistent
- We need to make sure the health stayed consistent
- We need to make sure the dining ware stayed consistent
- And so much more!
To have the audacity to ask for a full-grain toast, even if the user didn't choose to, for trying to fix the situation, is dismissive, misleading and not scientific at all.
We need to make sure that all details are assessed. Not just those few - late data-points.