The synopsis provided is poor, although since this is a source from hearsay which linked to a secondary source and then to the primary document in question, this is excusable. However, the source cited is an experimental design protocol, and Section 8.3 of this source describes the reporting protocols for adverse events. It is clear both from the verbiage and the purpose of the original paper that these are scenarios of interest or that may warrant stoppage by the test subject.
I have to respect the use of Early Modern English by the author of the PS article, he must think that is how college-educated people talk.
The synopsis provided is poor, although since this is a source from hearsay which linked to a secondary source and then to the primary document in question, this is excusable.
However, the source cited is an experimental design protocol, and Section 8.3 of this source describes the reporting protocols for adverse events. It is clear both from the verbiage and the purpose of the original paper that these are scenarios of interest or that may warrant stoppage by the test subject.
I have to respect the use of Early Modern English by the author of the PS article, he must think that is how college-educated people talk.