This was a replicative study that was initiated with a journeyman level certification instrument for an international union, when industry monitors were observed suggesting to examinees to "go with your first response." The question arose whether this was a researched-based practice. If not, wouldn't this practice inject constant error into the data, hence bring empirical validity into question? Using one hundred randomly selected examination answer sheets, erasures were catagorized as right to wrong, wrong to right, and wrong to wrong. A chi-square analysis found a significant gain in correct over incorrect changes. This was similar to studies performed with college students. The study restates the impact of changing answers on an objective examination; suggests that any non-standardized test-taking directions could inject constant error into the test data; and that the quantitative data on changing answers that was found for college students can be generalized to a non-college, technical, industrial population. (Author)