Buiding a Better Demo

[From Rick Marken (951120.2130)]

CHUCK TUCKER (951120.11:15) --

my major point is that THE TEST has never been done in any designed and
systematic manner between human beings W/O the "researcher" knowing in
advancC the CV

But what about the coin game? The researcher doesn't know the CV in advance.
And what about the "mind reading" game? All the researcher (computer) knows
is that the CV is one of five possible variables.

VERY FEW PEOPLE (even excluding "social scientists") CAN SEE SUCH DEMOS AS
RELEVANT TO THEIR OWN BEHAVIOR OR THE BEHAVIOR THAT THEY EXPERIENCE WITH
OTHERS; IT JUST DOESN'T COMPUTE! (Rick, it is much more complicated than
just saying these people don't know PCT; they actually do and use it
constantly but these demos don't make a connection with them).

I agree that most people don't seem to see how our demos are relevant
to their own and others' behavior. I'm willing to believe that part of
the problem is the demos themselves; they may seem too abstract. Maybe it
is difficult for people who are otherwise perfectly capable of understanding
"control of perception" to "connect" with these demos.

I have thought about this problem myself and have not been able to come up
with anthing that seemed particularly useful; I think I'm just an abstract
demo developer all the way. So I would really like to hear your ideas about
this; what do you recommend we do to put concrete flesh on the abstract
bones of these demos?

Best

Rick