Better Bowling Through Listening
Subtitle: An outline by Curt Merrill for a joint research venture between North laboratories and Make It Happen labs, a division of Urban Honking
ABSTRACT
Studies have shown the practice of subliminal suggestion to have little or no effect. However, other observations suggest that our unconscious, shaped by life experience, is more effective than our conscious mind at making important decisions and performing in "clutch" moments. This project aims to test the effectiveness of subliminal suggestion.
HYPOTHESIS
Can listening to an audio cassette containing subliminal suggestions improve bowling performace? Because bowling, like many other activities is a combination of physical and mental acumen, I expect a slight improvement in bowling scores to be attributable to participating in a subliminal program.
MATERIALS
"Bowling: Subliminal Tape Program" cassette
Various bowling establishments and equipment
Audio/Visual recording equipment to document progress
PROCEDURE
Stage 1: Baseline
Two subjects will bowl a standard three-game series according to Professional Bowling Association (PBA) rules. Subjects will use house equipment (balls and shoes) based on their comfort level. The scores from each game will be added together to form the baseline score for each subject (900-point maximum). The baseline games will be played concurrently at the same venue. This will take place during the week of March 27 while both subjects are in Las Vegas, Nevada, host of the PBA West Region doubles tournament.
Stage 2: Calibration
Each subject will bowl a three-game series at the venue of their choice once a week for four weeks.
Stage 3: Testing
After the final series of Stage 2, Subject A will begin listening to the subliminal program cassette for one hour each day. Both subjects will continue to bowl a three-game series each week for four weeks.
DATA
Subjects will provide the following data for each three-game series rolled
- Bowling Venue
- Lane Number
- Scores of individual games
- Total score for three game series
- Weight of ball(s) used
- Size of shoes worn
- Photo of shoes worn
- Time of first ball rolled
- Time of final ball rolled
- Number and type of beers consumed on game day (ending after final ball is rolled)
- Number and identification of bowlers accompanying subject
- Photographic documentation of score sheet
VARIABLES
There are many factors that may affect the subjects' performance.
Equipment:
The calibration period will allow subjects to find the most ideal equipment available. Though it will be impossible to use the exact same ball and shoes for each game, the subjects will naturally choose equipment that most closely re-creates their ideal equipment choices. The effect of equipment will therefore be minimal.
Alcohol consumption:
The effects of alcohol consumption on physical dexterity are widely known. However, the fraternal atmosphere of amateur bowling requires moderate levels of beer consumption. The subjects will effort to consume consistent amounts of beer on performance days in order to minimize the variability of the effects of alcohol consumption. Subjects are prohibited from drinking alcoholic beverages other than beer on performance days.
Varying lane conditions:
It will be nearly impossible to play each game on the same lane of the same venue. Subjects will bowl only at venues that also host league bowling events, operating under the assumption that league organizers will maintain their lanes according to consistent guidelines. Although minor variations may still appear, a skilled bowler must learn to adapt to these varying lane conditions as part of the game, therefore any effects due to condition variation are beyond the scope of this experiment.
Bowling subliminal program:
This is the key variable for this experiment. One subject will listen to the cassette according to the directions and the other will bowl without the aid of the auditory subliminal messages.
ANALYSIS
Once the data has been collected, researchers at North laboratories will examine the records kept by the subjects and attempt to determine whether or not the subliminal audio program was effective. Since the two subjects may not have the same level of bowling acumen, the net change in scores will be considered in order to compare the levels of improvement achieved by each subject.
BUDGET ESTIMATE
Bowling: $135 (3 games per week for 9 weeks per subject at $2.50 per game)
Shoe rental: $36 (9 sessions per subject at $2 per session)
Beer: $189 (3 beers per subject per week at $3.50 per beer)
Total: $360
SOURCES
Gladwell, Malcom. "Blink." New York City: Little, Brown and Company, 2005.
"Bowling Rules." Professional Bowling Association,
http://www.pba.com/resources/basics/bowling101.asp
"Subliminal message." Wikipedia. Wikipedia Foundation, 12 March 2006.
UPDATE: Results
The only problem I have with the experiment outline is the control group design. Rather than have one bowler listen to a subliminal bowling tape and the other listen to nothing at all, the experiment should call for the other bowler to listen to a tape sans subliminal messages. That way, both will assume they are receiving unconcsious assistance.
Without this safeguard in place, the results of an otherwise important and well-designed study could be at risk of complete invalidation.
So should we add a third subject to listen to a tape without subliminal messages, or just have the second subject listen? It seems like we need someone who's not listening at all for comparison, because theoretically even without listening that subject will improve somewhat just based on practicing.
Perhaps we need a third candidate to listen to a placebo tape? I think it should be someone not in Portland and not in Atlanta... Maybe we can recruit a G-Radder?
Compare the proposed study to one in which a pharmaceutical company would attempt to measure the effectiveness of a new painkiller.
The company would not be trying to find out if taking nothing at all for pain helps reduce it. The company would be trying to find out if adding an outside variable (the new painkiller) to a pain scenario has an effect.
That's why experiments of this type usually involve two groups - one taking the painkiller and one taking a placebo. To include a third group taking nothing at all would introduce an element the test is not designed to measure: the randomness of unassisted pain relief.
Also, by establishing your baseline in step one, you eliminate the need to control for the "practice effect" implied by Curt, because both bowlers have already established their normal average score.
If you really want to make things interesting, do the following:
Have Bowler One listen to a tape of subliminal bowling assistance; have Bowler Two listen to a tape containing what he thinks is the above but is actually just a normal tape; and introduce Bowler Three, who will listen to a tape of subliminal messages that he thinks will improve his bowling but actually makes him weep uncontrollably when he hears the song Desperado by The Eagles.
I don't think the comparison to a new painkiller is quite the right analogy.
We are expecting the tape to have no effect, but we are expecting the bowler will improve. So we want to compare the difference in the increased score.
I think there is more to the tape than just listening. The liner notes feature affirmations, which I assume are supposed to be repeated at some point. I haven't listened to the tape, yet, so I don't know. Which means we'd also have to come up with affirmations for the placebo tape, which introduces another variable: Is it the affirmations that help or the recorded audio or what?
The question we want to answer is: Will participating in the subliminal program on the tape produce better results than practice alone? It seems like having one bowler use the tape and one not will help answer this question.
That actually makes a lot of sense. And yes, I guess then the painkiller comparison is off the mark.
Besides, you could always go back later and narrow it down. Let's say the bowler who listened to the tape shows a significant improvement over the other bowler. Then you could do a phase-two study to find out whether it was the tape itself or the affirmations (or neither).
I smell a National Science Foundation grant. Mostly to cover beer costs.
I think I get what Ryan is saying. But I agree that this is a different study. There are ample studies that involve introducing a new technique to one group and allowing the control group to continue on with the old technique (which may be no technique at all). For example, in Smith, et al. Testing Videotape Education for Heart Failure, the subjects in one group watch an instructional video post-op and the control group does nothing (or at least does what all post-op patients have done). A comparison of the patients' effective self-management is made. I see an analogy between this study and Curt's.
I do wonder if bowling styles is an issue (i.e. if one person throws it straight and one curves his balls). Also, are we to assume that even if a baseline of bowling acumen is determined for each bowler that these bowlers would have a similar increase in skill level over time? In other words, what if you are an average 70-90 bowler vs. a 180-200 bowler. It seems that the latter is less likely to improve, or will have slower improvement regardless of any interventions. I think the bowlers should have a similar skill level.