A researcher studying 1,000 prison inmates noticed that prisoners who spend at least 3 hours per day reading are less likely to have violent encounters with prison staff. The researcher therefore recommends that all prisoners be required to spend at least 3 hours reading each day. (a) 0)) Should we follow the researcher's recommendation? Suppose that researchers were to test this researcher's hypothesis by randomly assigning 10 prisoners to a treatment group. Pris0ners in this group are required to go to the prison library and read in specially designated carrels for 3 hours each day for one week; The other prisoners, who make up the control group, go about their usual routines. Suppose, for the sake of argument, that all prisoners in the treatment group in fact read for 3 hours each day and that none of the prisoners in the control group read at all during the week of the study. Suppose that the results of this experiment were to indicate that the reading treatment sharply reduces violent confrontations with prison sta'. Can you conclude it's the reading per se that decreased violence? Is the fact that only 10 prisoners were assigned to the reading period a problem? Would potential outcomes be different if a very large proportion of prisoners were sent to prison library