I believe that the inductive argument made by Steingraber used empirical reasoning based on the evidence presented. Realizing that children's minds can be influenced positively or negatively by media advertising was his original hypothesis. As time went on, Steingraber modified his initial hypothesis as different variables came into play, such as eating fast food at McDonalds and his children starting school. This self-correcting process effectively demonstrated that his empirical reasoning was based on measurable manifestations. He understood that advertising was simply a method that could influence children's decisions about what they like and dislike, but he also understood that there were other factors involved that would have the same influence. Each time the children were presented with a different variable, their hypothesis was tested; for example, when children hated McDonald's food. The experiment is open to independent verification because it has been and could be repeated over and over again in different scenarios; however, it could be criticized as very rare for children to respond in this way because they only have two tests