Named by *Schmitt et al. (2011) as the One-Point, Correct-Wrong, and All-or-Nothing methods, respectively, all three methods have been adopted in previous studies (see Additional file 1: Appendix A).
For the WAF test with eight options, the One-Point method produced the strongest correlation (.885) and the correlations were.855 and.871 for the Correct-Wrong and All-or-Nothing methods, respectively.
Despite the evaluation conclusion that favored the All-or-Nothing method, *Schmitt et al. (2011) noted that an evaluation of scoring methods also needs to consider the purpose of the assessment.
*Schmitt et al. (2011) found that for the WAF test with six options, the All-or-Nothing method produced the largest correlation (.884) between learners' paper test and interview scores.
For the control of PCR amplification, all the products of positive control has been successfully amplified, while the products of negative control were amplified with nothing (see Methods section), which support for accuracy of the amplification of our target products.
Meanwhile, the comparison with all-or-nothing assignment method seemed unpersuasive.
Compared with all-or-nothing assignment method, this model was more practical and reasonable, according to the Beijing AFC data.
We opted for this all-or-nothing scoring method in order to provide some validity with respect to the everyday memory challenges that we were striving to operationalise, as discussed in the Introduction.
Nothing in the methods presented precludes the addition of feedforward control methods for added improvements in tracking.
Coulson insisted he knew nothing about the methods his reporter was using.
Despite speaking to a number of Vodafone employees via a variety of methods, nothing happens.
