That's what I meant. I'm not blaming the participants. It just reads too much like testimonials for LP where the participants are told their success depends on believing in it and their words reflecting that need to be positive. Pure tokenism in this case. There's a trend I noticed in clinical psychology: there is no criticism on substance. None whatsoever, other perhaps than James Coyne and a handful more. Whenever someone publishes a paper or a report the replies pile up, almost all saying variations of: "brilliant", "wonderful!", "genius!!11!". The comments read like people who were with the team as friendly like-minded observers, not critical stakeholders. Patient involvement requires independence and, frankly, hard-ass criticism. This isn't the time and place for niceties, certainly not for testimonials that read like a corporate brochure.