Let's say that I want to test a new headache medicine, to see whether or not it works. I could just give it to a bunch of test subjects with headaches and see if they get better. The only problem with this is that they might only get better because they THINK the medicine is working.
To counteract this, I "blind" my test subjects. That is, I give some of them the medicine, and some of them a fake pill, maybe made of sugar, called a placebo, but the patients don't know which one they're getting. Then, I can compare the results of the people who took the medicine against the results of the people who took the sugar pill, to see if the medicine worked better. This is single blind testing. The people who took the fake pill are called the "control group". They give us an idea of how the average person would respond without medicine.
The problem with single blind testing is that the people handing out the pills know which ones are medicine and which ones are sugar pills. This can affect how they act towards the patients, which can affect how the patients respond to the treatment. Patients may subconsciously pick up on whether they are recieving real medicine or placebo, based on how the people giving the medicine treat them. Also, the researchers may "see" more positive results from the people who took the medicine, because they want them to respond to the medicine.
In order to solve this problem, we need to "blind" the testees (the ones recieving the medicine) AND the testers (the ones giving the medicine). We have certain people set up the test and place the pills in premarked envelopes for each patient. We then have a different group of people hand out the medicine. These people have no idea whether they're handing out placebos or real medicine, they just give each patient the pill from the envelope assigned to them. Only the people who set the test up know which patient got sugar, and which got the real thing. This is an example of double blind testing, whether neither the person recieving the test NOR the person administering the test know whos in the control group and who is not.
An example of single blind testing in which the tester is blinded would be if we distributed the envelopes of pill just like in the second experiment, but had the people who set up the test tell each patient whether they were recieving placebo or real medicine. The researchers would pass out the medicine, still not knowing who was getting what, but the patients would know ahead of time. I can't imagine any reason why you would want to do this, but that's how it would work.
2006-09-11 14:51:54
·
answer #1
·
answered by marbledog 6
·
1⤊
1⤋
Single Blind Study
2016-11-02 09:40:40
·
answer #2
·
answered by corridoni 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
A single blind exp. is when the participants are uninformed as to their treatment.
A single blind exp. would be such as a doctor giving a known treatment, substance, pill to a group of individuals in 2 groups. 1 group recieves proper treatment the other a placebo and the info is gathered from those outcomes.
A double blind is when the administering aide or assistant are giving and the patients do not know if they are receiving the correct treatment.
2006-09-11 15:28:59
·
answer #3
·
answered by hoofs4me 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
This Site Might Help You.
RE:
can i get an example of a single blind experiment?
and b. a single blind experiment with the individuals measuring the response blinded
and c. a double blind experiment
2015-08-16 15:09:28
·
answer #4
·
answered by Rabbi 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
Well thought out strategy; just avoid being too predictable. Anyone who's paying attention will figure it out and it will be hard to get "paid" on some of those early big hands you are playing. They'll know you have a monster. Maybe play a level higher, $10 or $15 sng's. $5 players can be very tight, because they're down to the felt and playing so tight that the game gets boring. Sometimes there's more dead money on the table in a slightly bigger game. Patience will be the key to your success. Your plan will get boring after awhile and you will be tempted to leave it. I know it happens to me.
2016-03-16 03:28:41
·
answer #5
·
answered by Janet 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
For the best answers, search on this site https://shorturl.im/avOxt
i think your strategy for playing the tournaments themselves is very good, but i don't like this experiment and i would bet money that this will eventually hurt you if you stick to it...the reason for this is if you start running bad and continue to commit to this experiment, you may end up playing worse because you've been banging your head against the wall for say two weeks and you're just going to keep going back and playing the same game? for me, and i think for most players, one way to get away from running bad is to switch out of your regular game, and committing to this experiment would not allow you to do that and could theoretically cost you money
2016-04-09 06:32:20
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
A. 2 people taking an experimental drug, one real the other a placebo...only the researcher knows which is which.
B. The "patient" taking the experimental drug knows whether it is real or a placebo and the researcher performs examinations of the "patient" and uses his findings to decide whether the "drug" was real and had any effects.
C. A combo of A and B...only add a 2nd researcher that knows which participant was given the real drug and the other the placebo. The other researcher examines the 2 people taking the drugs to see which responded to the "drug."
2006-09-11 14:58:28
·
answer #7
·
answered by Angelic Vampiress 2
·
0⤊
1⤋