
In a reassessment of this in advance work and an extension of R programming project analysis, Williams 1968 stated ‘it seems likely that R programming task role performance of R programming assignment interviewer could either boost or mitigate R programming task biasing results of status features and potentially threatening questions’. The ‘objectivity’ of R programming task interviewer and degree of ‘rapport’ are, he noted, R programming project two main factors contributing R programming help a a hit interview, a view supported by other researchers Kornhauser and Sheatsley, 1959; Richardson et al. , 1965; Kahn and Cannell, 1958. However, other researchers have pointed out that an excessive amount of rapport can cause a strain towards consensus either consciously or subconsciously Newcombe, 1961; Emery et al. , 1957; Thibaut and Kelley, 1959. Williams’ follow up research rather amplified R programming project problems of achieving a a hit interview, and he concluded that ‘the critical query that continues to be unanswered is which aggregate of factors minimise bias’ Williams, 1970, p.