Flaws Discovered In BBC Science/Open University Experiment

Added : ( Sun Aug 08 2004 )

FLAWS DISCOVERED IN BBC SCIENCE/OPEN UNIVERSITY EXPERIMENT

For Immediate Release (cleared for republication by all media with inclusion of credit for World Net News)

by Reginald Cavendish

An ongoing, online experiment created by Dr. Peter Naish of the Open University, in conjuction with BBC Science, and hosted at www.bbc.co.uk/science/humanbody/mind/surveys/neckercube/index.shtml has been cited as being flawed with "worthless results" by researcher and conceptual theorist, Marshall Barnes. Marshall, who has just completed work on a new book on his unified theory of geometry, relativity, quantum mechanics and cosmology called, "the 4th D hypothesis", discovered the Naish experiment after researching the nature of the Necker cube, the wire frame cube drawing that allows sight of all 6 sides. When viewed closely, the cube is known to seemingly "flip" perspectives. Naish uses the Necker cube in his experimental survey to support the idea that the way people view the world can be determined by the way they view illusions. The initial hypothesis of the test is that extraverts will see the cube flip more times when asked than introverts, and introverts will see it flip more when asked to just passively view it than extraverts. According to the results online so far, this doesn't seem to be the case. Marshall claims to know why.

"I have no argument with their hypothesis," he said in an online interview, "but the real problem is that the results that they've obtained so far are worthless because they allow for false answers, which in turn cause the determination of who's an introvert and who's an extravert to be impossible. So, in the end, the Naish hypothesis could be exactly correct, but there's no way to tell."

Marshall took the test himself, which asks a person to view a Necker cube and either try to make the cube flip or just look at it. Every time they see the cube flip they are to hit the space bar on their computer keyboard. Marshall saw it flip 27 times in 30 seconds when asked to just look at it. That many times is on the high end of the scale possible flips, which by the hypothesis of the test would make Marshall an introvert. However, on the personality portion of the test his results show him to be "a mix between extravert and introvert". The results of the personality portion of the test weren't revealed until it was completed.

"That would seem to disprove their hypothesis," Marshall said, "but what they haven't factored in is the nature of how the Necker cube is actually interfaced with the human mind. There's no where on their test to indicate whether a person has had any prior experience using the Necker, which would seriously effect the results of their experiment, regardless of the person's personality." This is where Marshall's research of the Necker cube provided unique insights into the situation.

"What initially struck me about the questions was how ambigous they were," he continued, "which to me seemed pointless. If you want to know a person's personality, be direct about it, which they seemed to be avoiding deliberately. I say that because the test even indicated that a person should answer the questions one way or the other, even if they feel the answer 'depends' on the situation. I thought what's the point of that if you're trying to determine if a particular personality type will react to an indeterminate stimulas in a predictable fashion? What's the point if you haven't really determined which personality types are really having which reactions?

"That's when I realized that what they seemed to be doing, without saying it, was trying to prove something from reversal theory which was developed by Michael Apter. Reversal theory is actually antibehavioralist in nature and includes a number of aspects which are truly counter to what the test seems to be attempting to accomplish."

Marshall points out that the key portion of the test that he links to reversal theory is the test's idea that the way that people view the world can be determined by how they view illusions. In reversal theory there is the concept that there are identifiable ways of experiencing the world but which are not identical each time that the same scenario is experienced, and in fact can, according to a paper on the theory by Michael Apter, "go in pairs of opposites". This is where the 'reversal' is experienced. In fact, Apter says "The most obvious examples of this kind of change come from the field of perception, where reversal figures like the Necker cube have long been a topic of interest."

"That's where I made the connection", Marshall adds. "The test questions on the BBC Science site are deliberately ambiguous as to cause a person to not have the same responses all the time and yet they're trying to connect what they feel those repsonses indicate to the flipping of the Necker cube. The problem is they're mixing apples and oranges and trying to get apple sauce and it doesn't work and their own results prove that - as opposed to proving that their stated hypothesis is incorrect."

Marshall's observations would seem to be correct when the following quote from Apter is considered. He says "an individual can be in the same situation at different times, but experience it differently - and therefore behave in it differently".

"Another thing that sticks out is that reversal theory is a British theory and of course so is the BBC and the Open University", Marshall adds. "Personally I don't have a problem if Naish tried to use reversal theory to prove his hypothesis, but he doesn't say that. There's also no clear indication of how the probable variations in answers are used to determine who is extravert or introvert and by what criteria it shows relavence to reversal theory. The more you look at the whole thing, the more problematic it gets."

In a paper Marshall has published with a number of online email lists, he reconstructs what he feels would be the proper approach if the test were to be represented as just a straight forward personality experiment, without the reversal theory elements.

"I didn't take the reversal theory approach at all, though I mention it in my analysis. To reconstruct it, so that it would be effective as far as reversal theory is concerned, would have made it more complex than the test was presented in the first place. My analysis and reconstruction was based solely on what the BBC Science page presented, taking its documentation, and stated purposes, at face value. As far as I know, Naish may not have even realized the similarities between his actual approach and reversal theory. In either case, the true nature of the Necker cube and how the human mind actually interfaces with it, is beyond simply mere perception, as this experiment would address it. My upcoming book deals with that, at least as far as how the Necker cube functions as a model of quantum physics, particularly beyond the point first posited by Fred Alan Wolf, Ph.D, which was an important first step. In that respect it is possible to draw comparisons between perception of the Necker cube states and issues of both quantum physics and consciousness, separately and singularly."

Marshall's paper on the Necker personality test has been published in the email journal lists of psychology in the U.S. and in Britain.

Submitted by: Stacy Cordial Add your press release for free.

Find out more.