1594: Human Subjects - Revision history

2607:FB90:8B61:92F9:AC39:C132:6AE2:29A3: /* Explanation */

2025-10-29T13:25:54Z

‎Explanation

172.69.23.94 at 05:21, 14 March 2025

2025-03-14T05:21:12Z

172.71.146.57: it's -> its

2024-11-14T07:56:59Z

it's -> its

162.158.110.129: typo

2024-05-05T16:49:09Z

typo

Tromag at 20:05, 14 June 2023

2023-06-14T20:05:07Z

Natg19: /* Transcript */

2022-08-09T01:44:18Z

‎Transcript

Birdsinthewindow: /* Explanation */ Again, people can be terrible for reasons other than having personality disorders

2022-07-03T19:56:02Z

‎Explanation: Again, people can be terrible for reasons other than having personality disorders

Birdsinthewindow: /* Explanation */ Let's not bring stereotypes about mentally ill folks or incarcerated folks into this.

2022-07-03T19:53:13Z

‎Explanation: Let's not bring stereotypes about mentally ill folks or incarcerated folks into this.

Jacky720: rv

2022-05-04T23:55:17Z

Ex Kay Cee Dee at 23:55, 4 May 2022

2022-05-04T23:55:13Z

@@ Line 20: / Line 20: @@
 In each of these cases, the subjects seem to have some some very troubling personal and psychological traits. While a given study might include one or two people with such traits, just by chance, it appears that all, or nearly all, of the subjects in Megan's study possess a disturbing level of malice, and a lack of both empathy and fear of consequences.
-The title text refers to safety procedures normally required by {{w|institutional review board}}s, which are centralized groups within universities that ensure that experiments are ethical and safe. The implication is that the IRB, despite their professional and ethical commitment to safe studies, are so appalled by the people in this study that they're no longer concerned with their safety, or that safety measures are irrelevant at this point because they'll be broken anyways.
+The title text refers to safety procedures normally required by {{w|institutional review board}}s, which are centralized groups within universities that ensure that experiments are ethical and safe. The implication is that the IRB, despite their professional and ethical commitment to safe studies, are so appalled by the people in this study that they're no longer concerned with their safety, or that safety measures are irrelevant at this point because they'll be broken anyways. Or, perhaps, the researchers are so strictly obsessed with the safety rules that their actions are causing their test subjects to develop mental illnesses.
 ==Transcript==

← Older revision		Revision as of 05:21, 14 March 2025
Line 20:		Line 20:
	In each of these cases, the subjects seem to have some some very troubling personal and psychological traits. While a given study might include one or two people with such traits, just by chance, it appears that all, or nearly all, of the subjects in Megan's study possess a disturbing level of malice, and a lack of both empathy and fear of consequences.		In each of these cases, the subjects seem to have some some very troubling personal and psychological traits. While a given study might include one or two people with such traits, just by chance, it appears that all, or nearly all, of the subjects in Megan's study possess a disturbing level of malice, and a lack of both empathy and fear of consequences.

−	The title text refers to safety procedures normally required by {{w\|institutional review board}}s, which are centralized groups within universities that ensure that experiments are ethical and safe. The implication is that the IRB, despite their professional and ethical commitment to safe studies, are so appalled by the people in this study that they're no longer concerned with their safety.	+	The title text refers to safety procedures normally required by {{w\|institutional review board}}s, which are centralized groups within universities that ensure that experiments are ethical and safe. The implication is that the IRB, despite their professional and ethical commitment to safe studies, are so appalled by the people in this study that they're no longer concerned with their safety, or that safety measures are irrelevant at this point because they'll be broken anyways.

@@ Line 12: / Line 12: @@
 In the second panel, she mentions that several people in one study had been arrested for {{w|arson}}. Megan begins to suggest that the arson is a {{w|side effect}} of whatever is being tested before she learns that the arsonists are in the {{w|Treatment and control groups|control group}} – that is, the group that is ''not'' subjected to any kind of treatment. This suggests that Megan's selection process is heavily biased toward arsonists, for some reason.
-The third panel alludes to the {{w|prisoner's dilemma}}, which is a long study example of game theory in which two participants are forced to choose between protecting and betraying the other. Each will be rewarded for betraying the other, but the best outcome for both is achieved if neither of them does. This is often used as an example of a situation where each party narrowly pursuing their self-interest will lead to a sub-optimal outcome. Megan's subjects, however, overwhelmingly choose to betray their partners, before being told of any reward. This suggests that betraying their partners is a goal they'll seek for it's own sake.
+The third panel alludes to the {{w|prisoner's dilemma}}, which is a long study example of game theory in which two participants are forced to choose between protecting and betraying the other. Each will be rewarded for betraying the other, but the best outcome for both is achieved if neither of them does. This is often used as an example of a situation where each party narrowly pursuing their self-interest will lead to a sub-optimal outcome. Megan's subjects, however, overwhelmingly choose to betray their partners, before being told of any reward. This suggests that betraying their partners is a goal they'll seek for its own sake.
 The last panel references the {{w|Milgram experiment}}, which was designed to test compliance with authority. In the experiment, subjects were instructed by experimenters to administer electric shocks to a third party. While the shocks were fake, the subjects didn't know this, and the victims were instructed to feign pain and beg for it to stop. The experimenters insisted that the subjects continue administering shocks, and many subjects did so, despite their misgivings, simply because they were ordered to.

@@ Line 14: / Line 14: @@
 The third panel alludes to the {{w|prisoner's dilemma}}, which is a long study example of game theory in which two participants are forced to choose between protecting and betraying the other. Each will be rewarded for betraying the other, but the best outcome for both is achieved if neither of them does. This is often used as an example of a situation where each party narrowly pursuing their self-interest will lead to a sub-optimal outcome. Megan's subjects, however, overwhelmingly choose to betray their partners, before being told of any reward. This suggests that betraying their partners is a goal they'll seek for it's own sake.
-The last panel references the {{w|Milgram experiment}}, which was designed test compliance with authority. In the experiment, subjects were instructed by experimenters to administer electric shocks to a third party. While the shocks were fake, the subjects didn't know this, and the victims were instructed to feign pain and beg for it to stop. The experimenters insisted that the subjects continue administering shocks, and many subjects did so, despite their misgivings, simply because they were ordered to.
+The last panel references the {{w|Milgram experiment}}, which was designed to test compliance with authority. In the experiment, subjects were instructed by experimenters to administer electric shocks to a third party. While the shocks were fake, the subjects didn't know this, and the victims were instructed to feign pain and beg for it to stop. The experimenters insisted that the subjects continue administering shocks, and many subjects did so, despite their misgivings, simply because they were ordered to.
 Ponytail appears to be describing a similar experiment, until she reveals that the actual study had nothing to do with the shocks, and the subjects apparently smuggled in equipment, with the express purpose of administering real electric shocks to (presumably unwilling) people in another room.

@@ Line 10: / Line 10: @@
 This strip plays on certain experiments involving {{w|Human subject research|human subjects}}. [[Ponytail]] is questioning the reliability of [[Megan]]'s experimental results, given that her human subjects appear to be extremely unusual and surprisingly evil.
-In the second panel, she mentions that several people in one study had been arrested for {{w|arson}}. Megan begins to suggest that the arson is a {{w|side effect}} of whatever is being tested before she learns that the arsonists are in the {{w|Treatment and control groups|control group}} – that is, the group that is ''not'' subjected to whatever is being tested and is used as a comparison to see the differences in the people who are actually being tested. This result is "troubling", as the control group would not be expected to have such a high rate of incidence of arsonists. The implication is that her subjects are not representative of the general population, but appear to have been selected from a group unusually fond of arson. Perhaps she recruited them through an announcement that catered in some way to arsonists. An alternate explanation comes from comic [[790: Control]], in which [[Randall]] notes his hobby of sneaking into experiments and giving LSD to the control groups. Yet another explanation could be that Ponytail went looking for some clusters of characteristics in the sample population, which had no connection to the study criteria, and happened upon the arson arrests - such clusters are expected if you look at enough different characteristics.
+In the second panel, she mentions that several people in one study had been arrested for {{w|arson}}. Megan begins to suggest that the arson is a {{w|side effect}} of whatever is being tested before she learns that the arsonists are in the {{w|Treatment and control groups|control group}} – that is, the group that is ''not'' subjected to any kind of treatment. This suggests that Megan's selection process is heavily biased toward arsonists, for some reason.
-The third panel alludes to the {{w|prisoner's dilemma}}, in which two subjects must independently decide whether to "collaborate" with or "betray" the other subject based on different rewards for each choice (often framed as a different length of prison sentence, or a different amount of money). The rewards tier are selected so that the outcomes for each individual from best to worst are: betraying a collaborator, collaborating with a collaborator, betraying a betrayer, collaborating with a betrayer.
+The third panel alludes to the {{w|prisoner's dilemma}}, which is a long study example of game theory in which two participants are forced to choose between protecting and betraying the other. Each will be rewarded for betraying the other, but the best outcome for both is achieved if neither of them does. This is often used as an example of a situation where each party narrowly pursuing their self-interest will lead to a sub-optimal outcome. Megan's subjects, however, overwhelmingly choose to betray their partners, before being told of any reward. This suggests that betraying their partners is a goal they'll seek for it's own sake.
-The last panel references the {{w|Milgram experiment}}, in which subjects were instructed by experimenters to administer electric shocks to an unseen third party. The unseen third party was part of the experiment and pretended to be in agony. As shocks escalated they would beg for them to stop. The results suggest that people will continue to administer harm, despite the pleading of the victim, simply if told to do so by an authority figure, even when no incentive is provided to the subject to continue. In this case, however, the actual experiment did not involve electric shocks, and thus suggests that the subjects, of their own volition, brought equipment to produce electric shock and simply engaged in the activity unprompted.
+The last panel references the {{w|Milgram experiment}}, which was designed test compliance with authority. In the experiment, subjects were instructed by experimenters to administer electric shocks to a third party. While the shocks were fake, the subjects didn't know this, and the victims were instructed to feign pain and beg for it to stop. The experimenters insisted that the subjects continue administering shocks, and many subjects did so, despite their misgivings, simply because they were ordered to.
-In each of these cases, the subjects seem to have some "negative" psychological traits. While it might not be unusual to find one or two people with such traits in a randomly selected group, the fact that all three experiments contain multiple subjects with these traits (and seemingly the same traits in each study) is very unusual, given that most were not studies on psychology, but studies of drugs and moisterizers. Obviously, there would be no need for electric shocks and such in a studies like this{{Citation needed}}, and Megan's claim that a side effect of using the investigational drug is arson is unlikely if it wasn't treating psychological issues. Even if it was, arson is a very specific issue that is unlikely to not coexist with other problems.
+Ponytail appears to be describing a similar experiment, until she reveals that the actual study had nothing to do with the shocks, and the subjects apparently smuggled in equipment, with the express purpose of administering real electric shocks to (presumably unwilling) people in another room.
-The title text refers to safety procedures normally required by {{w|institutional review board}}s, which are centralized groups within universities that ensure that experiments are ethical and safe. The implication is that for an IRB to recommend dispensing with safety procedures after meeting the subjects, the subjects must really, ''really'' deserve bad treatment. Or that after hanging out with the jerks in the study they are more relaxed on rulebreaking, and adopting their mindset. Or the members of the IRB are, like the human subjects, just awful people. Or that Megan is selecting for these subjects, or causing these abnormalities, as a side effect of spending (probably significantly) more effort than is necessary to adhere to the procedures.
+In each of these cases, the subjects seem to have some some very troubling personal and psychological traits. While a given study might include one or two people with such traits, just by chance, it appears that all, or nearly all, of the subjects in Megan's study possess a disturbing level of malice, and a lack of both empathy and fear of consequences.
 ==Transcript==

@@ Line 48: / Line 48: @@
 [[Category:Science]]
 [[Category:Psychology]]
-[[Category:Research Papers]]
+[[Category:Scientific research]]

@@ Line 19: / Line 19: @@
 In each of these cases, the subjects seem to have some "negative" psychological traits. While it might not be unusual to find one or two people with such traits in a randomly selected group, the fact that all three experiments contain multiple subjects with these traits (and seemingly the same traits in each study) is very unusual, given that most were not studies on psychology, but studies of drugs and moisterizers. Obviously, there would be no need for electric shocks and such in a studies like this{{Citation needed}}, and Megan's claim that a side effect of using the investigational drug is arson is unlikely if it wasn't treating psychological issues. Even if it was, arson is a very specific issue that is unlikely to not coexist with other problems.
-The title text refers to safety procedures normally required by {{w|institutional review board}}s, which are centralized groups within universities that ensure that experiments are ethical and safe. The implication is that for an IRB to recommend dispensing with safety procedures after meeting the subjects, the subjects must really, ''really'' deserve bad treatment. Or that after hanging out with the criminals they are more relaxed on rulebreaking, and adopting their mindset. Or the members of the IRB are, like the human subjects, just sociopathically awful people. Or that Megan is selecting for these subjects, or causing these abnormalities, as a side effect of spending (probably significantly) more effort than is necessary to adhere to the procedures.
+The title text refers to safety procedures normally required by {{w|institutional review board}}s, which are centralized groups within universities that ensure that experiments are ethical and safe. The implication is that for an IRB to recommend dispensing with safety procedures after meeting the subjects, the subjects must really, ''really'' deserve bad treatment. Or that after hanging out with the jerks in the study they are more relaxed on rulebreaking, and adopting their mindset. Or the members of the IRB are, like the human subjects, just awful people. Or that Megan is selecting for these subjects, or causing these abnormalities, as a side effect of spending (probably significantly) more effort than is necessary to adhere to the procedures.
 The overall theme of experiments that are overwhelmingly skewed by outlier human factors is in itself reminiscent of the recent discovery that [http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/28/science/many-social-science-findings-not-as-strong-as-claimed-study-says.html many psychological experiments cannot be replicated]. That news made quite a bit of noise in the world of science and even made its way in the general press. Just like in the experiments that could not be replicated, it is likely that if the experiments in this comic were attempted again, the outcome would be drastically different than the one achieved here.

@@ Line 8: / Line 8: @@
 ==Explanation==
-This strip plays on certain experiments involving {{w|Human subject research|human subjects}}. [[Ponytail]] is questioning the reliability of [[Megan]]'s experimental results, given that her human subjects appear to be extremely unusual and highly {{w|sociopathic}}.
+This strip plays on certain experiments involving {{w|Human subject research|human subjects}}. [[Ponytail]] is questioning the reliability of [[Megan]]'s experimental results, given that her human subjects appear to be extremely unusual and surprisingly evil.
-In the second panel, she mentions that several people in one study had been arrested for {{w|arson}}. Megan begins to suggest that the arson is a {{w|side effect}} of whatever is being tested before she learns that the arsonists are in the {{w|Treatment and control groups|control group}} – that is, the group that is ''not'' subjected to whatever is being tested and is used as a comparison to see the differences in the people who are actually being tested. This result is "troubling", as the control group would not be expected to have such a high rate of incidence of arsonists. The implication is that her subjects are not representative of the general population, but appear to have been selected from some aberrant subpopulation, such as a prison or mental institution. Or she could have recruited them through an announcement that catered in some way to arsonists. An alternate explanation comes from comic [[790: Control]], in which [[Randall]] notes his hobby of sneaking into experiments and giving LSD to the control groups. Yet another explanation could be that Ponytail went looking for some clusters of characteristics in the sample population, which had no connection to the study criteria, and happened upon the arson arrests - such clusters are expected if you look at enough different characteristics.
+In the second panel, she mentions that several people in one study had been arrested for {{w|arson}}. Megan begins to suggest that the arson is a {{w|side effect}} of whatever is being tested before she learns that the arsonists are in the {{w|Treatment and control groups|control group}} – that is, the group that is ''not'' subjected to whatever is being tested and is used as a comparison to see the differences in the people who are actually being tested. This result is "troubling", as the control group would not be expected to have such a high rate of incidence of arsonists. The implication is that her subjects are not representative of the general population, but appear to have been selected from a group unusually fond of arson. Perhaps she recruited them through an announcement that catered in some way to arsonists. An alternate explanation comes from comic [[790: Control]], in which [[Randall]] notes his hobby of sneaking into experiments and giving LSD to the control groups. Yet another explanation could be that Ponytail went looking for some clusters of characteristics in the sample population, which had no connection to the study criteria, and happened upon the arson arrests - such clusters are expected if you look at enough different characteristics.
 The third panel alludes to the {{w|prisoner's dilemma}}, in which two subjects must independently decide whether to "collaborate" with or "betray" the other subject based on different rewards for each choice (often framed as a different length of prison sentence, or a different amount of money). The rewards tier are selected so that the outcomes for each individual from best to worst are: betraying a collaborator, collaborating with a collaborator, betraying a betrayer, collaborating with a betrayer.

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:55, 4 May 2022
Line 1:		Line 1:
−	crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap crap .;,'"?!~~<nowiki><>~~{{comic}}~~</nowiki>~~	+	{{comic
		+	\| number = 1594
		+	\| date = October 23, 2015
		+	\| title = Human Subjects
		+	\| image = human_subjects.png
		+	\| titletext = After meeting with a few of the subjects, the IRB actually recommended that you stop stressing out so much about safety guidelines.
		+	}}
		+
		+	==Explanation==
		+	This strip plays on certain experiments involving {{w\|Human subject research\|human subjects}}. [[Ponytail]] is questioning the reliability of [[Megan]]'s experimental results, given that her human subjects appear to be extremely unusual and highly {{w\|sociopathic}}.
		+
		+	In the second panel, she mentions that several people in one study had been arrested for {{w\|arson}}. Megan begins to suggest that the arson is a {{w\|side effect}} of whatever is being tested before she learns that the arsonists are in the {{w\|Treatment and control groups\|control group}} – that is, the group that is ''not'' subjected to whatever is being tested and is used as a comparison to see the differences in the people who are actually being tested. This result is "troubling", as the control group would not be expected to have such a high rate of incidence of arsonists. The implication is that her subjects are not representative of the general population, but appear to have been selected from some aberrant subpopulation, such as a prison or mental institution. Or she could have recruited them through an announcement that catered in some way to arsonists. An alternate explanation comes from comic [[790: Control]], in which [[Randall]] notes his hobby of sneaking into experiments and giving LSD to the control groups. Yet another explanation could be that Ponytail went looking for some clusters of characteristics in the sample population, which had no connection to the study criteria, and happened upon the arson arrests - such clusters are expected if you look at enough different characteristics.
		+
		+	The third panel alludes to the {{w\|prisoner's dilemma}}, in which two subjects must independently decide whether to "collaborate" with or "betray" the other subject based on different rewards for each choice (often framed as a different length of prison sentence, or a different amount of money). The rewards tier are selected so that the outcomes for each individual from best to worst are: betraying a collaborator, collaborating with a collaborator, betraying a betrayer, collaborating with a betrayer.
		+	The thought experiment is considered interesting as it's uncertain what the most logical course of action, as choosing betrayal always improves one's situation, yet being in identical situations with no knowledge of each other, it's also logical for both prisoners to make the same choice and both collaborating is better than both betraying. Of course, it would not be expected that normal people would simply betray each other for no reason, without benefiting from it in any way.
		+
		+	The last panel references the {{w\|Milgram experiment}}, in which subjects were instructed by experimenters to administer electric shocks to an unseen third party. The unseen third party was part of the experiment and pretended to be in agony. As shocks escalated they would beg for them to stop. The results suggest that people will continue to administer harm, despite the pleading of the victim, simply if told to do so by an authority figure, even when no incentive is provided to the subject to continue. In this case, however, the actual experiment did not involve electric shocks, and thus suggests that the subjects, of their own volition, brought equipment to produce electric shock and simply engaged in the activity unprompted.
		+
		+	In each of these cases, the subjects seem to have some "negative" psychological traits. While it might not be unusual to find one or two people with such traits in a randomly selected group, the fact that all three experiments contain multiple subjects with these traits (and seemingly the same traits in each study) is very unusual, given that most were not studies on psychology, but studies of drugs and moisterizers. Obviously, there would be no need for electric shocks and such in a studies like this{{Citation needed}}, and Megan's claim that a side effect of using the investigational drug is arson is unlikely if it wasn't treating psychological issues. Even if it was, arson is a very specific issue that is unlikely to not coexist with other problems.
		+
		+	The title text refers to safety procedures normally required by {{w\|institutional review board}}s, which are centralized groups within universities that ensure that experiments are ethical and safe. The implication is that for an IRB to recommend dispensing with safety procedures after meeting the subjects, the subjects must really, ''really'' deserve bad treatment. Or that after hanging out with the criminals they are more relaxed on rulebreaking, and adopting their mindset. Or the members of the IRB are, like the human subjects, just sociopathically awful people. Or that Megan is selecting for these subjects, or causing these abnormalities, as a side effect of spending (probably significantly) more effort than is necessary to adhere to the procedures.
		+
		+	The overall theme of experiments that are overwhelmingly skewed by outlier human factors is in itself reminiscent of the recent discovery that [http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/28/science/many-social-science-findings-not-as-strong-as-claimed-study-says.html many psychological experiments cannot be replicated]. That news made quite a bit of noise in the world of science and even made its way in the general press. Just like in the experiments that could not be replicated, it is likely that if the experiments in this comic were attempted again, the outcome would be drastically different than the one achieved here.
		+
		+	==Transcript==
		+	:[Ponytail and Megan sit at a desk.]
		+	:Ponytail: We're concerned that some of your results may be tainted by the fact that your human subjects are ''awful''.
		+	:Megan: What do you mean?
		+
		+	:[Ponytail picks up a sheet of paper.]
		+	:Ponytail: Several participants in your drug trial were arrested for arson.
		+	:Megan: Side effects can be unpredictable.
		+	:Ponytail: They were in the control group.
		+
		+	:[Zoom in on Ponytail.]
		+	:Ponytail: In your prisoner's dilemma study, 80% of the participants chose to betray their partners '''''before''''' the experimenter had a chance to tell them about the reward.
		+	:Megan (off-panel): Definitely troubling.
		+
		+	:[Ponytail shows Megan another sheet of paper.]
		+	:Ponytail: In one experiment, your subjects repeatedly gave electric shocks to a stranger in another room.
		+	:Megan: That's a famous psychological-
		+	:Ponytail: This was a study of moisturizing creams!
		+	:Megan: Yes, we're not sure how they snuck in all that equipment.
		+
		+	{{comic discussion}}
		+	[[Category:Comics featuring Ponytail]]
		+	[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]
		+	[[Category:Science]]
		+	[[Category:Psychology]]
		+	[[Category:Research Papers]]