More descriptive experience sampling

It is something of a puzzle to me that Hurlburt's descriptive experience sampling (DES) is not more widely used by those interested in the nature of our subjective experiences, our consciousness. As he himself says somewhere, if you want to know about consciousness, why not ask the people who are having it? Much easier and cheaper than doing your experiments with all manner of cumbersome and expensive machinery.

So I was pleased, prompted by I forget what, to come across reference 3, the authors of which appear to have the same puzzle, with their conclusion including: '... While we share many [of the] doubts about the ability of subjects to report accurately on finely-detailed features of their experience, we also share Hurlburt’s optimism about the reliability of DES in allowing subjects to accurately apprehend broad, coarse-grained, features. The second issue builds upon the first: given that DES is a reliable source of data about at least many features of ongoing conscious experience, how can we put this method to use in answering outstanding psychological and philosophical questions? We suggest that DES embodies a useful method for ...'.

Pleased, but still puzzled. Why does uptake seem to be a bit thin?

My own thoughts at references 1 and 2.

Reference 1: http://psmv3.blogspot.co.uk/2016/08/descriptive-experience-sampled.html.

Reference 2: http://psmv3.blogspot.co.uk/2017/01/progress-report-on-descriptive.html.

Reference 3: Descriptive Experience Sampling: What is it good for? - Mark Engelbert and Peter Carruthers – 2011. Not exactly open access, but google will turn up a copy that you can download.