It is usually assumed that an action potential begins immediately at the cathode. If this were true, both methods for calculating conduction velocity would provide the same answer. However, when a strong stimulus intensity is used, the action potential may begin some distance away from the cathode. Under these conditions, the difference method would be more accurate. Did you observe any important difference between the conduction velocity values?

Provided in the explanation section

Explanation:

Our questions says that:

It is usually assumed that an action potential begins immediately at the cathode. If this were true, both methods for calculating conduction velocity would provide the same answer. However, when a strong stimulus intensity is used, the action potential may begin some distance away from the cathode. Under these conditions, the difference method would be more accurate.Did you observe any important difference between the conduction velocity values?

Answer to this :

By using the difference method, you subtract out any "uncertainties" involved in the measurement of latencies. Say for example, saw we are uncertain as to where the AP's are actually originating within the vicinity of the stimulating electrodes, this "error" will be introduced into both latency measurements, and therefore subtracted out when performing a difference method calculation.

However, the difference method is only experimentally sound when one is dealing with the same population of nerve fibres over the recording electrodes used, which is not the case with the sciatic nerve, as it is a short nerve, and thin at one end.

    The non-uniformity of the nerve, and the difficulty in making accurate measurements of very small distances and latencies are principal points to consider when making conduction velocity measurements. Naturally if the nerve studied were longer and more uniform, we would improve the accuracy of our calculations.

cheers i hope this helped