RE: Red Bead "simulator"

["Dave Carr" <dc0955@gates.com>]

>I think the Red Bead Experiment is best described and remembered, not
as
>a statistics experiment, for its statistical outcome is not in the
least
>bit surprising, but fundamentally as an experiment in social
psychology.

Experiment in social psychology - agreed.

>Its essence is the observation of how ordinary people behave when
>immersed in a largely random process but motivated by an authority
>figure to believe that the process result is both systematic and
under
>their control. Accordingly, I believe it should be considered and
>critiqued along with social psychology experiments such as Milgram's
>experiments with obedience to authority and Seligman's experiments on
>learned helplessness. In this type of experiment, the purpose is not
to
>observe, demonstrate, or simulate the experimental set-up, which is
>pre-determined and simply not intended to be very surprising or
>informative. The purpose to observe the experimental subjects' --
here
>the Willing Workers' -- psychological reactions to it. 

I am not sure if you are saying it is "only" an experiment in social
psychology. If that were the case I would have to disagree. The average
persons understanding of even the simplest principles of variation are
often lacking. One illustration of that is the previously mentioned
"What will the average percentage defective be in the long run?" When
you know that "exactly 20%" is the wrong answer you have learned
something new about variation. 

>I believe it would be difficult for a computer to aid an experiment
of
>this nature, because the experiment is fundamentally one of SOCIAL
>psychology, and the presence of the authority figure and group
>environment is essential to its social context. Just as it is
doubtful
>that subjects in Milgram's authority experiments would respond to a
>computer simulation in the same way they would respond to a human
>authority figure, so it is highly questionable whether Willing
Workers
>would respond to a computer simulation in the same way they would
>respond to a human manager in a physical work situation. The two
>environments would simply not be anything like the same. Any effort
to
>use one an environment as a substitute for the other might serve only
to
>cast doubt on the reliability of the results. 

Difficult - yes. Most attempts I have seen at SPC simulation poor -
yes. Impossible - no. Online gaming is highly social and has
psychological effects ( this is one reason to be concerned with its
focus on violence ). A simulated authority figure may be able to get
away with things that may be inappropriate or even frightening if they
were acted out in real life. That may be one of the strengths of
simulation, it is both real and not real at the same time, it is a safe
place to explore new ideas and social experiments and maybe even have
fun.

<snip>
>I don't believe any simulation could replicate the effect of these
>reactions, because it is observing them that makes it possible,
>psychologically and scientifically, for people who have been taught a
>certain way of thinking all their lives to be willing to consider the
>possibility that it doesn't work. 

Your lack of belief is sure encouraging me to try, thanks Jonathan, I
like a challenge. Have you ever went with some friends on a simulation
ride? Have you ever played a mutli-player video game with a group of
friends? Have you ever been to a LAN party? If you have can you say that
simulation does not provide a shared emotional and social space?

>I suspect these types of paradigms can get shifted, if at all, only
by
>hard, raw, emotion-laded evidence. I don't think a simulation can be
>probative in this way either psychologically or scientifically. One
can
>always believe and feel, in the back of ones head, that what is being
>demonstrated is just a video game, just somebody's might-be being
>demonstrated on a computer. It isn't really real, and it doesn't feel
>real, either. 

You may be right, but again I think this may be less true for the
younger generation. I don't believe they make as clear a distinction
between the real and unreal as my generation did ( this may scare me,
but it is a part of their culture ). I am skeptical that the game is
fake, it's rigged, I don't believe that is as much of a problem for
them. Also as in flight simulation the simulation is soon followed by
time in a real plane. When I see that the real plane behaves the same as
the simulated plane it reenforce what I learned in the simulator. I'm
sure we could provide them with an opportunity to apply what they
learned in simulation on the real factory floor :-)

- Dave Carr