Blind testing & the quest for the triple blind test

Pheromone Science Pheromone Theory & Molecules
1

This is not the latest Harry Potter Novel

OK I arrived here merely wanting an unfair advantage in life (perfectly innocent)
Now I’ve read all about the diverse & complex world of AD, I am totally on board with their research and testing concept and I’m keen to finance, test, write, think etc.
Every question I’ve come up with, you fantastic bunch of Phero-ists have answered somewhere in here. The one thing I haven’t found much discussion on is…

Blind testing, love the concept, gotta employ it to get significant results and eliminate any unwanted conscious or unconscious influence.
I am terrible already, I love the concept of pheromones, I want them to work, therefore I am crap tester.

My first question is; Who is the test subject, me or the people I interact with? (I guess both is the obvious answer)

I should probably check this on Wikinonsense, but to me?

A Blind Test is when the test subject does not know if they have had a placebo or the real thing. In this case generally the people I interact with are tested blind but I am not, even if I haven’t read up on the effects of a particular P or MX on others, I probably have some inkling of what I’m looking for.

A double blind test is when both the test subject & the tester don’t know. So, the people I interact with & I can’t know what we are testing, to make this work I probably need to buy a mystery ToGo from AD that may just be Alcohol & Scent or may be the magic 14th molecule (I’d happily risk $10 on that) that would double blind test my interactions but not me. To double blind test myself I need the above + the guy at AD that decides who to send what bottle to, well they can’t know what they’re sending out to me.

Triple blind testing. (This may be a load of bollocks but stick with me :wink: ) So, all of the above double blind test + whoever is creating the database, collating & analysing the results deep in the back office of AD, well they can’t know what is what either! Only when it is all finished & the results are in can the mystery guy that put the mystery labels on the mystery bottles of ‘whatever’ reveal all.

This probably isn’t very practical, but it was a complicated thought that I just had to write down.

2

Interesting concept. IMO I think this is what the SDT MX freebies are about :stuck_out_tongue:

Since my first order I have been lucky enough to have a handful of free MX’s.What I am finding, along with a couple of other’s is …no hits/noticeable self effects from the recent 4’s.

It had crossed my mind that it terms of research and validity, it makes sense to blind test with placebos, and personally after not seeing/feeling anything with my recent freebies I’m still of this view.

It may be though, that whatever the recent MX I tested are, the dosage or mix is not for me. I think mones are like a Christian Laboutin shoe. One size does not fit all and each to their own. :smiley:

3

I recently got the MX436 (Stealth diffusion test) which although I know nothing of the actual diffusion technology, I know what the molecule is & therefore have a preconcieved idea of what I’m looking for, spoiling the blindness of the test. I did get a few effects, but less than expected and maybe I was looking too hard?

Assuming that I’m not constrained by any ethics (true) my perfect blind test would be to does my mate without him noticing (yeah right) then follow him around all day, subtly, with a note book logging his interactions :wink:

4

What your saying makes total sense when scientifically testing molecules.

First the testing here is more for marketing research and although its helps move the science forward you wont see any journal papers written coming out of AD.

Blind, double blind and triple blind testing is conducted in a controlled environment. Your right, its not practical for AD. They can’t be everywhere and control the environment everywhere products are shipped out. AD is just not set up to do this over the Internet.

From talking to staff over the years its my understanding that a certain amount of (semi) blind testing in a controlled setting is done before a molecule ever makes it to the shelves. If they think the molecule or mix has potential and is doing something they release it and members buy test and report. Its then cross checked if what was seen in the blind testing lines up with what people in the real world environment (forum) are experiencing.

Pheromones by nature are as Gingaber pointed out not “one size fits all”. This creates an obstacle of its own. Since they enhance whats already there and that is different for each individual you can blind test all you like and still come to a similar conclusion.

Its not like testing meds where you just look at the physical attributes of a individual such as gender, age and health. Personality, life experience, environment, all play a roll in how the mone works.

So blind testing just tells you the basic character of the mone it cant however tell you how people will react to that character in a real life setting and that’s what AD is looking at. The real life environment… Do these molecules that react this way in a controlled environment have the same potential in an uncontrolled environment ? Can it be marketed and be effective ? Remember to market something people have to know what it does to some extent.

Yes you answered your own question. Its both and here lies another facet of testing. You need to work with mones to see the best results. you can steer them towards success or failure simply with how you behave wearing them. Its there nature really. I believe there is always a certain amount of “placebo” with mones and frankly with most things in life. Its the simple law of cause and effect.

There is a certain amount of things you can do to make the testing more blind or at least semi blind.

Dont read up on the putatives you buy before purchasing them. Then you wont know what they are inclined to do.

Get a few putatives at once. (about 3 or 4) Wrap them all in the same color construction paper. Mix them up and test each one individually. Do not take the wrappers off till all the bottles have been fully tested and be sure to mark the bottles after you have mixed them up so you know what results went with what bottle.

You can do the same with mixes that carry the same scent.

Spray them on a friend who has no knowledge of what mones do. (of course get permission) Observe how they behave.

Once you have a nice collection of to-go bottles you can buy a bottle of scent from AD that has no mones in it. Usually used for mixing. Make a few dummy bottles and some with mones in it and test.

As far as AD sending out placebos there is an issue of consumer protection. They could probably do it with free gifts but not with a product sold that is presented as a pheromone. Not in this setting at least.

I know its not a perfect method and environment here at AD but we dont live our lives in a perfect controlled environment.

Tisha

5

If you seeking permission for something like that, ask something like: “If there’s something that I could secretly do to make you more attractive to woman, would you mind?”

Then you wait a few weeks and then you run your test.

A lot of psychology experiment setup is about getting permission from people to do something without explaining the experiment to them.

If you are really interested in how stuff works for other people I would recommend you to learn hypnosis.
If you are skilled at hypnosis you should be able to set up an environment where you can test that stuff without the person knowing.

If you have more success with women thanks to phermones you are in a good position to help a friend who doesn’t have much success with woman.

In hypnosis you can install a trance anchor that allows you to make someone for 15 seconds unconscious without them noticing. You can apply your pheromeones during that time.

If you speak with someone about hypnotising him it’s also easy to ask for general permission to do stuff that benefits the other person without asking them directly for everything.

If you test like that you can blind yourself additionally by wrapping the bottles into colored paper.

6

The way a test would normally be conducted that is double blind:

A psychology professor would have a graduate student do his work for him distributing two sets of masks, A and B

A is treated and B is placebo that is EXACTLY IDENTICAL accept the pheromone. The graduate student does NOT know A is real and B is placebo… only that one mask is A and one is B

People are told they are being evaluated on something completly unrelated to pheromones… like we are determining how fast humans can react to a stimulus (basicly get the people to believe they are being tested on something they aren’t to avoid observer effect on what we are actually testing) then you show them faces while exposes them to mask a or b and ask questions about the photo… like how attractive is this person, or how believable, or how trustworthy… and the graduate student takes the information. The graduate student can’t bias what he believes will happen since he doesn’t know. the professor compares the results of the A group versus B statistically using ANOVA (anaylsis of varience) to determine with a certain percent probability that A had an effect that B didn’t have… and ANOVA accounts for error also, making it usefull…

but anywho!

You and your reaction to people would be all part of the experiment, it would be a person sitting on the outside of the whole thing that would determine its reaction… who didn’t know if you’d been given the real stuff or not… so hes not biased to report false info to prove his theory or to pay attention to only what he wants… all this data would be compared by someone even further down the line.

you can single blind test much easier. not knowing what you are using… and taking detailed notes of each bottle (2 bottles, one real one not) once both bottles are done compare notes. This is a weak study type but would work enough. If you wanted then you can do another type of single study, instead of doing all of one bottle, then all of another… you try one bottle three days, then another three days, and back and forth till their gone… uncover the bottles and know what days you used the real stuff and what days you used fake stuff and compare to the pattern you discerned BEFORE you uncovered the bottles. if the pattern shows alot of progress with your real stuff and no progress with fake stuff then youve twice shown its effective.

None of this will qualify for a medical journal haha but it will do alot to take away confounds ect.

7

just saying… to clear up about psychologists…

  1. we have federal law dictating all we are and are not allowed to do in an experiment, one of which is using deception. The deception technique must still tell the person about all the risks and benefits ect… and can only be used if there is a MINIMAL oppertunity for risk to harm. We tell the truth about everything but use deception only in the fundemental concept we are testing… which after the test we usually tell the person the truth of what they were tested on.

Anywho… if you used hypnosis to get conscent you’d be in jail haha in a real experiment anyways