Patrick wrote: 2) If we want to "sell" our pattern to other scientists (e.g. in psychology), backing up patterns we cannot prove (using accepted rules) with statistical evidence makes sense - it's a matter of building rapport. Patrick - I can relate to your sentiment. Statistical models are the norm in the social sciences and it is often difficult to sell our ideas without them. I believe that the key will be to train people in emergent process-based approaches like dynamic systems approaches.  I can see virtually no way for us to explicate patterns by doing analysis of aggregates -  we lose too much valuable information. For instance, as a Feldenkrais practitioner, knowing the "average amount" that a person can rotate their hip is irrelevant information for me. I want to know "what can this person do, right now, in this context, and how can I help her move easier now and into the future (i.e. generalize her new behaviors/ movements to other contexts)." In my psych research, I am interested in development of particular behaviors as they occur, in time and in relationship, in a dyad - mother-infant, practitioner-student (etc). If I were to quantify behaviors and average across dyads, I would lose the actual process. The rub, of course, is that sensory-based, process based research is often denigrated by  social scientists, most who simply do not know how to think without their statistical models. My sense is that psychologists (including nearly all of my professors and fellow grad students) don't know how to recognize and respond to pattern. Likewise, they don’t have a strategy to give meaning to a pattern. The larger framework for them (deep structure?)  is (I think) a desire to find "the cause" of a behavior. I.e. Where is the "genetic program," "motor program," "cognitive structure," that produces behavior X? When researchers are trained to look for an "It" it is difficult to step back and see the pattern. If you want to begin to train yourself in how to scientifically capture the evolution of behavior through time I recommend; "Dynamic Patterns" by Scott Kelso and "A dynamic systems approach to the development of cognition and action" by Esther Thelen and Linda Smith. Peace. Ryan