• pruwyben@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    104
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    Before playing the game, the participants sniffed either female tears or a saline solution

    Why would they not include male tears in the test?

    • bjorney@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      45
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      11 months ago

      If male tears were the only control, then they run the risk of not finding any result. If you have 3 groups, you need a substantially larger sample size because you are running a less powerful statistical test.

      Easier to start with the test that’s most likely to work, and narrow it down from there if you succeed

      • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        17
        arrow-down
        9
        ·
        11 months ago

        Having men sniff three different samples would still allow for saline as a control and wouldn’t really make the data set that much more complicated.

          • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            15
            arrow-down
            9
            ·
            11 months ago

            Just college lab courses, but come on, it’s pretty basic. The experiment merely tests a single variable by changing it while keeping everything else the same. There could have been dozens of different samples that men sniffed and it wouldn’t really make the data complicated.

            It would increase the length of the test, though, so dozens of samples would have been cumbersome. But just two? Literally just “see how the test group responds to sample 1, sample 2, and the control sample”? That’s not complicated science. You probably did that in highschool lol

            • criitz@reddthat.com
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              12
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              11 months ago

              Testing multiple hypotheses this way still requires additional sample size because there is an increased error likelihood. From a statistical point of view, the most efficient test may be to stick to one variable like this.

            • DanglingFury@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              6
              ·
              edit-2
              11 months ago

              I’m guessing they had to stay within their funding/budget and didn’t want to reduce the sample size to increase the number of variables tested. MRIs are expensive

              • HubertManne@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                11 months ago

                they should just be getting time on the machine although maybe also tech time. either way doing multiple with a single individual is easier than more individuals.

                • Meowoem@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  11 months ago

                  But that makes it more complex because you have to start worrying about the order they’re done in because it might be different emotions playing your first or third game plus the effect might linger, take time to show, etc.

                  Far better to answer one simple question and prove there is an effect then follow up tests can look at finding the bounds to that and starting to narrow in on identifying mechanics.

                  • HubertManne@kbin.social
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    11 months ago

                    its been done with other things. its an mri so regardless of order the simuli should light up the brain regions. either it does it or it does not.

    • Ryumast3r@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      26
      ·
      11 months ago

      They said they had a hard time finding men who would cry.

      They also didn’t test women sniffing women’s tears, or men sniffing men or women sniffing men, or animal tears.

      They left a lot of variables out of this one.

    • pewter@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      11 months ago

      I thought the same thing, so I checked the real paper and they do end up explaining their reasoning.

      As for social interactions among humans, future research will explore whether the new study’s findings apply to women. “When we looked for volunteers who could donate tears, we found mostly women, because for them it’s much more socially acceptable to cry,” Agron says.

      I’m interested if the results are same for male tears and also if they’re the same for women who smell either gender’s tears.

    • bedrooms@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      11 months ago

      Seems there was a study that concluded female tears raise testosterone of men. I thus think it’s kinda understandable they did it in this way. But, yeah, not really convincing.

    • Silverseren@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      I feel like they should also have experimental groups of children and the elderly, to see whether age also has an effect on hormonal responses.

      I suppose that applies both in regards to tears from and how tears affect. Hmm, I can see this getting rather complicated and extensive.

      • EdibleFriend@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        11 months ago

        I feel like they should also have experimental groups of children and the elderly

        I find this is my answer to most things honestly.

    • foggy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      18
      ·
      11 months ago

      Because they sought to justify male aggression toward a non-subservient target.