
When it's OK to manipulate users w psych A/B testing - steven
https://medium.com/backchannel/inside-the-largest-virtual-psychology-lab-in-the-world-7c0d2c43cda5
======
typicalrunt
To answer the title: it's never OK to manipulate users. Let's look no further
than the dictionary to see why.

Here is the OED definition (3rd entry):

    
    
        manipulate: To manage, control, or influence in a subtle, devious, or underhand manner.
    

It's sad people are seriously talking about human experimentation like it's a
noble thing. Regardless of the fact that it's using bits and bytes, these are
peole's minds being experimented on. Since nobody signed up for taking part in
the experiment, this PhD should lose his credentials for performing immoral
experiments. Instead he is praised because we euphemize it as "A/B teting" and
most people don't know that these experiments are immoral.

Even the article accidentally lets it slip that these experiments are immoral.
The article mentions that when Mr. Lin was receiving his PhD he had a team of
students as test subjects. My guess would be that these students signed
waivers and acknowledged that they would be part of an experiment (hence "test
subject"). What Mr. Lin is doing now is using gamers as test subjects without
their consent.

If this were any other industry, or if the experiments targeted a physical (as
opposed to mental) part of the body, I think people would be more angry at the
callousness of these so-called scientists. Heck, what if GE or Monsanto came
out with a glowing article stating the benefits of A/B testing on farmers'
mental states and their crops?

edit: added definition

edit 2: To explain why I get so outraged when I see articles like this...
receiving my Bachelor of Science meant that I had to understand the right and
wrong way to conduct experiments. And experimenting on humans is the most
cumbersome because, to be honest, you can really screw someone up if you
aren't careful. Even the most innocuous experiments can lead to bad outcomes
for the test subjects, so one doesn't simply jump to human trials until you
can conclusively argue that it won't damage another person.

~~~
drabiega
Well, I'm not entirely sure that subtly influencing people to be nicer to each
other is a bad thing and I don't see how anything they are doing is devious or
underhanded.

~~~
typicalrunt
> I'm not entirely sure that subtly influencing people to be nicer to each
> other is a bad thing

This would be a subjective opinion. The ends do not justify the means.

I agree with you that getting people to act nicer to each other is a nice
goal, but you can't do it by enlisting them all into a hidden experiment.

> I don't see how anything they are doing is devious or underhanded.

Well that's the point of A/B testing isn't it? The user doesn't realize that
they are part of the experiment. That's the devious part. If they had signed
up to be part of an experiment, then at least it wouldn't be an underhanded
maneuver to start changing game UI or semantics on them without their
knowledge.

------
pmalynin
In my opinion trash talk is part of the game, part of the fun I'd even say.
Part of the reason I still play Heroes of Newerth sometimes is to have the
undiluted experience of arguing, or fighting trolls, and other various
degenerate behaviours. Hell, even Michael Jordan commented on the importance
of such behaviour in basketball.

More generally, however, this makes me a little scared. Feels like eventually
it will get to the point where the machine learning engine will be able to
recognize if I'm having bad thoughts and serve "quick punishment".

------
drabiega
Manipulation is, ironically, a loaded word. The primary differences between
'manipulation' and the subtle behavioral clues we give to others we
communicate with is that the latter is generally done unconsciously and thus
not based on testing and intent. This applies to games as well, as in this
case. The design of your UI is going to influence your user base, so why is it
a bad thing to try to ensure that it influences them in a positive way?

------
falcolas
It's a vain wish, but I wish there were more oversight when companies do
experiments with our emotions.

Who is to say that Facebook was wrong while Riot was right? Who is to say that
long term impact Riot's "tests" that produced negative consequences had on
people? Who is there for those people who were affected negatively?

Nobody.

------
PeterWhittaker
The headline is incorrect, it should read _Inside the Largest Virtual
Psychology Lab in the World_.

