# Brainstorming. Ideas? **URL:** \ **Category:** Men's Pheromone Advice & Field Reports\ **Created:** [October 23, 2007, 2:10am UTC](https://pheromonetalk.com/t/brainstorming-ideas/6176 "2007-10-23T02:10:40Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 3\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Soulpiercer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/74df32/32.png) [@Soulpiercer](https://pheromonetalk.com/u/Soulpiercer)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2007, 2:10am UTC](https://pheromonetalk.com/t/brainstorming-ideas/6176/1 "2007-10-23T02:10:40Z")
okay, so I’ve been lurking around for a few weeks reading through these threads. Despite being very impressed with the dedication and wealth of information available on this forum, I have a few thoughts that I’d like to brainstorm, and perhaps have clarified by the vets here. I’ve got some ammo on order right now just to give a basic trial run, but my next order is likely to be more specialized for research interests. And if this type of considerations helps my personal life, all the better. I should note that this is for personal interest experimentation for the most part. I’m fascinated by subliminal perceptions on the whole, and if I do post out whatever experiments I happen to do, it’s likely to be just for this forum and whomever is interested as opposed to an academic setting. so without further ado… 1. A major problem people have with [pheromones](https://pheromonelabs.com/shop/) is a lack of consistency in results, correct? This means that it’s unreliable, calling into question the validity of it’s effects. Placebo effect is a powerful thing in any context, often more powerful an effect than that found in the chemica’s of most medications. This being said, I’m wondering whether anything has been done to try to resolve this? Specifically, I’m thinking experiments regarding double blind studies as one potential options. If you yourself don’t know whether u’ve sprayed pheromones or cologne, expectations are no longer a factor in results. 2. Has any testing been done on standardized measures regarding ability change? In this regard I’m thinking do specific classes of pheromones (ie. - none) affect dimensions such as IQ, or personality dimensions (as found on MMPI for example). Even projective tests would be helpful if they were giving consistent differences in scoring, tho I have no faith in the validity of them. And along that line, what products would be the best bet to test for ability changes? I presume spaceland would be effective at impairing attentional abilities for instance, and perhaps instant openness would decrease impulse control. This is actually the part that seems to be most neglected in this field, when this type of research would give the most worthwhile results and would specify what dimensions the specific chemical acted upon. That being said, any suggestions on what products would likely have the largest effect in this field? spaceland I presume would have the largest detrimental effects on performance, but would any of these be likely to be enhancing in such tests? Honestly, I’m surprised that people haven’t done self-testing in this regard more commonly. It’s easy to regulate a double-blind self study doing online IQ tests for instance. It would take a fairly large amount of data to get significant results, so the more people that do that, the more that can be generalized from the mean differences. 3. I’m completely at a loss as to how to find baseline pheromone signatures. I know this has been discussed a lot, so I’m not expecting any answers here really, but some way to be able to get even a rough estimate of an individual’s pheromone status at a given moment is almost essential to remove a 3rd variable. Elsewise every experiment anyone has done is called into question since it is not only your own signature that is being varied, but also the individual who responds will have a different signature, obscuring the cause and effect of the hit. anyone have any ideas how this could be determined at all? a litmus paper for scents, so to speak. Scientifically isn’t my necessarily a concern here, a guesstimate would do for my purposes. 4. This is the part that makes me giddy with anticipation. Respect and trust seem to be the words most commonly utilized to describe the effects these chemicals produce in others regardless of type. Another word for those 2 is rapport, which is a key concept to me. This should realistically suggest increased suggestibility. I’ve already been doing experiments using hypnosis for quite a while, and I am certainly willing to make the stretch of judgement that increased hypnotic susceptibility is a measure of (or at least positively correlates to) susceptibility to opinion change in general. With luck, a combo like instant shine and instant openness should be bottled rapport. Makes me kick myself for being impatient and ordering ammo instead of all of these at once, but hey, I’m young and impatient, leave me be lol. lol, I’m not even really done w/ the ideas I’ve got for this, but I’m already rambling too much, so I think I’d best stop for now. I do appreciate the help, tho. Being that I have no personal experience with this field (yet), the experiences of veteran users is invaluable to me. btw, sorry if this is off topic or redundant information I’m seeking. Give me some slack, I am still a n00b here 😉 At least I’ve actually taken the time to try to look for this before I asked. I see indicators that this type of thing has been looked for, but very indirectly, and not conclusively by any means. ---
**Author:** ![MarkL](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/pheromonetalk.com/markl/32/825_2.png) [@MarkL](https://pheromonetalk.com/u/MarkL)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2007, 4:18am UTC](https://pheromonetalk.com/t/brainstorming-ideas/6176/2 "2007-10-23T04:18:36Z")
> [@Soulpiercer](#): > > \ … > > 1. This is the part that makes me giddy with anticipation. Respect and trust seem to be the words most commonly utilized to describe the effects these chemicals produce in others regardless of type. Another word for those 2 is rapport, which is a key concept to me. This should realistically suggest increased suggestibility. I’ve already been doing experiments using hypnosis for quite a while, and I am certainly willing to make the stretch of judgement that increased hypnotic susceptibility is a measure of (or at least positively correlates to) susceptibility to opinion change in general. With luck, a combo like instant shine and instant openness should be bottled rapport. Makes me kick myself for being impatient and ordering ammo instead of all of these at once, but hey, I’m young and impatient, leave me be lol… My first observation leads me to question the model of hypnosis you seem to be relying on. IF “susceptibility” is a core concept in that model – a model where a “authoritarian hypnotist” imposes suggestions on a “compliant subject” (and where success is related to how “susceptible” the subject is to suggestion) – then I’d like to suggest you reconsider that way of framing hypnosis. What if, for example, hypnosis is a purely generative, cooperative learning activity? What if success is grounded in how well two people … interoperate … at a non-conscious level (sounds like a veiled reference to sex, heh!) rather than how compliant one is to the other’s direction? One way to get cooperation (of sorts) is for one person to “obey” another. But you’d certainly agree that there are other ways for cooperation to happen. And “A obeys B” is perhaps the most naive model of cooperation that’s available to humankind. Perhaps it’s worth considering that every pheromone creates a form of rapport. At a molecular level, pheromones signal between two humans … to coordinate some kind of behavior. - One kind of rapport is ‘territorial distance deference’ … (A314) - Another kind of rapport is ‘territorial intimacy’ … or ‘let’s celebrate together’ (Instant Shine) - Another is ‘ready to mate/mating desire’ (-none) - Another might be ‘let’s talk about what we know’ (-nols) etc. BTW … I suspect that the reason Spaceland has reported ‘disruptive’ effects is the **surprise factor** – not the pheromone itself, but the unusual fact of such a concentration of pheromones/recognition of such. ---
**Author:** ![Soulpiercer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/74df32/32.png) [@Soulpiercer](https://pheromonetalk.com/u/Soulpiercer)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2007, 5:03am UTC](https://pheromonetalk.com/t/brainstorming-ideas/6176/3 "2007-10-23T05:03:23Z")
> [@MarkL](#): > > My first observation leads me to question the model of hypnosis you seem to be relying on. IF “susceptibility” is a core concept in that model – a model where a “authoritarian hypnotist” imposes suggestions on a “compliant subject” (and where success is related to how “susceptible” the subject is to suggestion) – then I’d like to suggest you reconsider that way of framing hypnosis. LOL, I’m sorry if I gave off that impression. No sir, I do not follow the stage hypnosis dictates. I learned through clinical methods, and one of the most important aspects to the induction and the preparation to the induction is to inform and educate the subject regarding hypnosis. Along this lines I ensure to tell every individual that I can not make them do anything they do not desire to do. Furthermore, everybody I’ve ever performed hypnosis on has been fully informed as to what the purpose of the session is to be, as well as what my goals are. Authoritarian is absolutely the last image I want to convey to people, and is absolutely unnecessary in the process, although I’ve noted in the literature that the “skill, charisma, and wisdom” of the hypnotist is mentioned an awful lot, I’m more akin to believe such effects are more a result of expectancy effects and subject cooperation to be a ‘good subject’. Professionalism, yes, but authoritarianism, no. It may seem like splitting hairs to most, but it’s a world of difference. Mind you, I am still a student, but I do take this particular subject seriously, and I take every precaution I can to ensure nobody suffers harm of any kind as a result of my actions. To state it briefly, my current conception of hypnosis is a social cognitive process with effects more akin to tapping generalized disattentional and focused attentional abilities. I suspect, and thus far have found, that there is little difference between hypnosis and simple meditation. I’m simply a medium towards the experience; sort of a focusing crystal for thoughts during the meditative trance. However, for this to work, a very large part of this is TRUST, more than compliance. Although trying to seperate compliance from cooperation -which IS essential- is almost impossible. Too much overlap. When I mention suggestibility in hypnosis, it contains a large number of qualities therein (fantasy-proness, amnesia-proneness, openness to experience, rapport, etc. etc.), trust and compliance are only 2 samples of this wider set. Regardless, most of the characteristics which measure hypnotic susceptibility are also found to correlate to suggestibility regarding opinion change. This has nothing to do with my conception of hypnosis, this is based on other correlationary studies I’ve done along the way. And I can’t tell you which subset of abilities is important for the correlation, because the subsets of abilities hypnotic susceptibility scales are measuring aren’t likely valid; but they are reliable. And thus are useful so long as correlations are reliable. So I am willing to use it as a general measure for items such as opinion change, trust, and compliance, because it is far more useful for understanding people as a whole. Sorry for the length, but I’ve got to defend that one. Hypnosis gets attacked far too often on the grounds that the terms have developed negative connotations, it takes some explaining to get the points straightened out.