Affidavit of Noncompliance 2009-2024 Form

There are a number of places online to look for peer-reviewed published HCI studies. Here are several good ones for usability of web forms: HCI Bibliography : Human-Computer Interaction Resources ACM Digital LibraryWebSM.org - Web Survey MethodologyA quick search resulted in these research studies measuring response rates of online forms. It seems like in addition to eye-tracking you can also use keystrokes to measure user behavior: Denscombe, Martyn. 2006. Web-Based Questionnaires and the Mode Effect. Soc. Sci. Comput. Rev. 24, 2 (May 2006), 246-254. DOI=10.1177/0894439305284522 Healey, B.: Drop Downs and Scrollmice: The Effect of Response Option Format and Input Mechanism Employed on Data Quality in Web Surveys. Social Science Computer Review 25(1), 111–128 (2007) Hogg, A., Masztal, J.J.: Drop-down, Radio Buttons, or Fill-in-the-blank? Effects of Attribute Rating Scale Type on Web Survey Responses. In: Proceedings ESOMAR 2001 (2001)Nikolaos Karousos, Christos Katsanos, Nikolaos Tselios, and Michalis Xenos. 2013. Effortless tool-based evaluation of web form filling tasks using keystroke level model and fitts law. In CHI '13 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI EA '13). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 1851-1856. DOI=10.1145/2468356.2468688 Mirjam Seckler, Silvia Heinz, Javier A. Bargas-Avila, Klaus Opwis, and Alexandre N. Tuch. 2013. Empirical evaluation of 20 web form optimization guidelines. In CHI '13 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI EA '13). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 1893-1898. DOI=10.1145/2468356.2468695 Vicente, P., & Reis, E. (2010). Using questionnaire design to fight nonresponse bias in web surveys. Social Science Computer Review, 28(2), 251-267.As for what the user actually does in regards to scan first or fill first, it depends on other factors beyond the design such as personal styles and cognitive styles. One approach to overcome the uncertainty of the answer to your question is by placing one question on a page at a time.

“Why does police paperwork take so long? I hear that officers can spend up to 4 hours to process a DUI suspect. Do officers spend that time just filling out boxes on a large stack of paper?”I was involved in several hundred (maybe close to a thousand) DUI and Zero Tolerance cases during my career and I can attest to the fact that DUI cases — especially the reporting process — were generally the most time-consuming cases I was involved in.The basic reason why DUI cases take so long to complete? Defense attorneys.First, I am going to be as clear as possible in this regard and state, unequivocally, that it is good and proper that a DUI defendant's rights must be a primary consideration. It is essential to the US criminal justice system that the defendant has a competent, vigorous defense. That defense, however, is the major reason why so much goes into reporting a DUI case.A maxim in policing is “If it’s not in the report, it didn’t happen.” Since DUI cases sometimes come to trial several months or even years after the incident, it would be ridiculous to believe that an officer would be able to remember much about a particular incident. That’s why officers write reports, and those reports must document a lot of observations made by the officer. Video has helped tremendously, but you can’t always count on video being available (due to problems with equipment or data corruption) or useful (a squad car’s camera facing the wrong direction or a body-worn camera obstructed by the Standardized Field Sobriety Test (SFST) instruction book). Officers must be prepared and capable of writing very detailed reports on their observations of suspected DUI drivers.Successfully defending against a DUI case generally involves attacking the primary reason for the stop, the officer's decision to further investigate the driver for DUI, or the administration of the SFST battery. Of these three issues, most of the time and attention is given to attacking the administration of the SFST battery.Again, I'll be clear — it is very important that an officer knows how to properly administer the SFST battery. However, some of the attorneys who attack the SFST battery apparently believe these tests are done in a controlled laboratory environment, because some of their complaints are based on very exacting standards. For example, the SFST battery instructions for the one-leg stand test include asking the person to stand on one leg for 30 seconds. Some successful defense attacks have been based on the officer telling the person to end the test after 29.4 seconds instead of after the full “30” seconds. In others, the test is attacked based on another officer letting the person stand on one leg for 31 seconds.In other cases, defense motions to quash SFST results were successful based on the officer having a driver complete the Horizontal Gaze Nystagmus (HGN) test, but mistakenly starting the HGN test by moving the stimulus to the officer’s left, not the driver’s left. While everything else may have been done exactly right, the defense motion to quash is successful because the HGN “standard” was established by officers moving the stimulus to the driver’s left. I have never heard of anyone actually claiming that the results would be different by moving the stimulus to the officer’s left first, but the test was developed and certified by moving the stimulus to the driver’s left, so if it’s not done that way, the results may be inadmissible.Another issue with HGN is the time frame involved in moving the stimulus from side to side, and how long the stimulus is held at the far outside edge of the driver’s vision (maximum deviation). Defense attorneys have successfully attacked HGN by timing the tests down to a tenth of a second, complaining both when the test is done too quickly and when it takes longer than the “standard” time.So… to make a short story long, officers must know how to administer the test and how to document that the test was administered properly. That adds a lot of time to the initial arrest and process of documenting the case.Again, to be very clear on the matter, I’m not saying it’s wrong or bad to expect officers to know what they’re doing while investigating and reporting a DUI. I would love it, though, if someone would re-evaluate the SFST battery including some of the variations involved in defense claims. For instance, does it really make any difference if the HGN is started from the left instead of the right? I’m guessing no. The same goes for ending the one-leg stand a half-second early or two seconds late, or any of the very minute differences involved in those defense claims.

Under the much older planetary model of electrons, I think it was assumed that the electrons (relativistic?) kinetic energy kept them in orbits flying around around rather than collapsing, similar to planetary gravitation, or something like that.Under the semi older but now not quite accurate probability model, mathematically, there's the most likelihood of finding an electron in a shell some distance away from the nucleus, but that doesn't necessarily mean the electron doesn't pass closer to the nucleus…if I understand correctly. See here: Why Don't Electrons Just Fall Into the Nucleus of an Atom?Under the current understanding, electrons, neutrons, protons, and everything else are just some sort of emergent perturbations of underlying quantum fields, and the whole game no longer even makes any sense in a way that we can classically imagine it. It's beyond my understanding as to why those quantum fields seem to resolve, at least in terms of physical interaction, into something that seems to have an outer probability electron shell and a lot of empty space in between. I will leave it to the experts so perhaps answer that (cue Viktor T. Toth).