A study by David Watson evaluates the effectiveness of different survey methods for birds.  Titled Comparative Evaluation of New Approaches to Survey Birds, it focuses comparing new methods to survey avifauna diversity.

In the study he compares two emerging methods, which he himself devised for measuring bird diversity, and two methods that are used widely in the field today by Australian Ornithologists or Ecologists. To determine which method was the most successful he compared the results of the tests to the discrete count; or the actual richness. He analyzed the benefits and the drawbacks of sac method as well.  He conducted the study on four different preserve plots in grassy box woodlands in areas of Albury and New South Wales.  The plots which were chosen were varied in size so as to best determine if a specific method is better suited to a specific sized plot.

David found that of the four sampling methods his new method of strict standardized search yielded the most complete results of 78.4 percent completeness. This method involved 20 minutes searches, and after three consecutive searches yielded no new species  you were to stop sampling.  Another stopped rule was applied to his second new method, which although its completeness was only 72.5 percent, it took half the time of the strict standardized search making it much more efficient.  Lenient standardized search stopping rule was simply stop when the number of species seen in a single sample period were equal to the species seen in two sampling periods.

Compared two the two older methods of repeat transect and time-balanced area-proportionate transects the two standardized methods were clearly the better methods.  Repeat transect only producing 33.8 percent completion, which the TBAPT produced only 37.1 percent competition.  So all in all his new survey methods were much more effective at determining the diversity of the avifauna of the preserves than were the methods in use by most ornithologists in 2004.