Background
Hey, I am AplAy, anonymously speaking and I am an averege-looking guy who is
around 21 years old and I live in Sweden and I am scientist-nerd and I love to
make things as scientific as possible. I have also always been interested in girls
and how you can “get girl”, chicks, women or whatever you choose to name 'em.
This Journal of Experimental Pheromone Usage When Meeting Women will be
about only the observed effects, progress and concrete results when I meet
women in my college, public places, at parties and/or clubs. I have as I am
writing this, ordered 0.16 lbs ‘“AMMUNITION” (In the Battle of the Sexes!)
Pheromone Cologne for Men’ (1x in strength). I was thinking to order “TUTH”
but I have been reading in many threads about it (did a thread search on the
term “TUTH”) and people say it can be used wrongly and they suggest AMMO.
So, I will start off with this AMMO first and notice how many and how intense
different effects and results are on me (self effects) and others (effects
and/or results). I want to mention that I make a difference between effects
and results. Effects for me are things such as “IOIs”, looks, head-turns and so
on, while results for me are numbers, kisses, makeouts, handjobs, blowjobs,
sex, relationships, women approaching/initiating conversation with me.
These are just my definitions of effects and results and I just wanted people
who wants to read this Journal from my point of view. I will also in the next
posts be very objective as humanly possible and I will save subjective views
after I have described and explained certain effects. I want to avoid acting
like I found the holy grail (until I surely know I have or just something really
good to use) and thus talking in more dry text but widely described though.
Ethical Concerns
I will not be telling people that I am wearing pheromones that are supposed to
have certain impacts on them. I do not intend to harm, hurt or damage any
person in my upcoming experiments. Since I will not be telling people what I
am actually doing, this would be almost like natural observation, but in this
case I will be an active observer, a participator in the beauty of nature itself.
I will do in my best power to make other people in my environment to feel that
their lives are enriched by my experiments but since I will never tell them why
or what I was doing certain things my experiments do not reach the criteria
for being called “scientific” my measure methods are also highly limited as well.
Theoretical Frameworks
There are a few theoretical frameworks that I will try to orient myself in and
between when I will be interpreting the observed effects and results in all my
upcoming experiments. Since I will be the only “self-claimed scientist” in all
the experiments there will probably always be a lack of objectivity when I do
interpret my experiments afterwards and write a report on them here. Just
keep that in my as you read the upcoming reports of my phero-experiments.
Misattribution Arousal Theory first. This is a theory of arousal that states
that sometimes people misinterpret what really caused them to feel arousal.
This has been shown in experiments (1) where men find a woman more
attractive because they attributed her looks to the arousal they felt when
they were standing on a high bridge where the female approached them.
Also, research shows this to be true in women as well and that there are
many different ways to induce arousal such as exercise as well as fear (2).
Another interesting framework is something known as commitment and
consistency (3). This states that people are more committed to continue
doing something if they feel it was their own choice to begin with it in the
first place and also that it seems consistent with what they previously did.
These are some frameworks that I will be trying to interpret from and
understand my effects and results from when interacting with women.
Experimental Challenges
Finally, since I will be doing these experiments on my own without any
“outsiders” observering me as I am trying to observe what happens, I
will probably run into some cognitive biases that may confound my
interpretations. For example, since I have been reading what AMMO is
supposed to do, I might be intentionally looking for it and not being able
to observe when my hypotheses are false. This is the confirmation bias (4).
Another possible challenge is that I might feel I do not want to report here
when I find that the effects and/or results are none. This is the well-known
publication bias (5) which must be taken into account when reporting here.
A third challenge is the placebo effect (6) where I might experience that I
suddenly notice more “IOIs” (effects) just because I am now observing since
I have now put on cologne and are looking how people are responding to me.
A fourth challenge and the last one is the post-purchase bias (7) or choice-
supportive bias (8). Both these biases have to do with the fact that I might
rationalize that I actually saw more effects and/or results with the bought
product because otherwise I would have to tell myself that I was stupid.
All these biases need to be taken into consideration when experimenting,
observing and interpreting the effects and/or results of the experiments.
Conclusions and Beyond
I am really looking forward for the product to come. I do not know what to
expect since I haven’t seen anyone using any of the products from the site
here in Sweden so it will be really interesting to see how the Swedes will be
reacting towards my AMMO-cologne and hopefully it will be all just positive!
With all this said I will be reporting back as soon as I have gotten AMMO and
started going out with it in different areas where you can find girls & women.
\\ AplAy ///
References
-
Dutton, D., G. & Aron, A., P. (1974). Some evidence for heightened sexual attraction under conditions of high anxiety. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 30, 510-517.
-
Vosgerau, J. (2010). How Prevalent Is Wishful Thinking? Misattribution of Arousal Causes Optimism and Pessimism in Subjective Probabilities. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 139, 1, 32–48.
-
Cialdini, R., B. (2007). Influence: The Science of Persuasion. New York: HarperCollins Publishers Inc.
-
S. Nickerson, R., S. (1998). Confirmation Bias: A Ubiquitous Phenomenon in Many Guises. Review of General Psychology, 2, 2, 175-220.
-
Easterbrook, P., J. & Berlin, J., A. (1991). Publication bias in clinical research. The Lancet, 337, 8746, 867-872.
-
Hróbjartsson, A. (1996). The uncontrollable placebo effect. European journal of clinical pharmacology, 50, 5, 345–348.
-
Cohen, J., B. & Goldberg, M., E. (1970). The Dissonance Model in Post-Decision Product Evaluation. Journal of Marketing Research, 7, 3, 315-321.
-
Mather, M. & Johnson, M., K. (2000). Choice-supportive source monitoring: Do our decisions seem better to us as we age? Psychology and Aging, 15, 596-606.