starmark: (OPTIMIST ☆ it's a big blue watery road)
Jotaro Kujo ([personal profile] starmark) wrote in [community profile] prismatica2020-05-30 10:58 pm
  • Add Memory
  • Share This Entry
Entry tags:

text, un: researcher

[ NOT POSTED TO NETWORK - DATASET ]


SURVEY ONE

RESPONDENT PAIRS
SANGUIS/CORDIS:
SANGUIS/IRIS:
CORDIS/IRIS:		 1
4
6

RELATIONSHIP TYPES
M/M
M/F
F/F		 4
5
2		 (2 S/I, 2 C/I, 0 S/C)
(2 S/I, 3 C/I, 0 S/C)
(0 S/I, 1 C/I, 1 S/C)

MOONBLESSING ATTRIBUTES OF DATAPOOL
SANGUIS:


CORDIS:



IRIS:		 WOLF - 4
RAM - 1

CAT - 5
KITSUNE - 1
WINGS (??) - 1

BAT - 3
JELLYFISH - 3
RABBIT - 1
DEER - 2
RACCOON - 1

MOONBLESSING ATTRIBUTES BY PAIRING TYPE
SANGUIS/IRIS:



CORDIS/IRIS:





SANGUIS/CORDIS:		 WOLF/BAT (2)
RAM/JELLYFISH
WOLF/RABBIT

KITSUNE/BAT
CAT/DEER (2)
WINGS/JELLYFISH
CAT/RACCOON
CAT/JELLYFISH

WOLF/CAT

MOST COMMON REPORTED TRAIT
SANGUIS:

CORDIS:


IRIS:		 POSSESSIVENESS

HUNGER
PHEREMONES

NEED FOR AFFECTION

TIME SINCE ARRIVAL
ARRIVED SAME:
ONE MONTH DIFF.
> ONE MONTH DIFF.		 5
2
4

OBSERVATIONS:

  • Every Sanguis in the S/I pairing type reports possessive behavior; most Irises report some form of clingy/needy behavior

  • Four of six Cordises report increased hunger, four of six Cordises report pheromones

  • Three of four cats report becoming ASSHOLES

  • One Iris in the C/I pairing type mentions essentially no symptoms of moonblessing

  • Three of six Irises in the C/I pairing type report going into heat, five of six report heightened affection

  • Five of eleven respondents have been here the same amount of time

  • Seven of eleven respondents have been here the same or within one month of each other


    • - ☆ ☆ ☆ -


    SURVEY TWO

    MOONBLESSING PREDICTIONS
    GUESSED CORRECT:
    GUESSED INCORRECT:
    DECLINED TO GUESS:    		 4
    3
    1

    OBSERVATIONS:

  • Of the seven actual responses, five thought they were going to be Iris.

  • Both respondents who guessed wrong about being Iris are actually Cordis.

  • No one guessed Iris and wound up Sanguis.

  • No one guessed they would be Cordis.

  • Two people guessed they would be Sanguis; one was correct and one was wrong.

  • The Sanguis who was wrong is actually an Iris.


    • >> People who are Iris seem to be slightly better at identifying that they will probably be Iris.


    [ /DATASET ]

    ~

    Hey, it's me again, the guy from last month who was doing that survey about the moonblessings.

    I think I've got some pretty good data now so people who were interested in seeing a copy of that, you can message me here if you want and I'll share it.

    Not sure what I'm going to do next but there's some good stuff to think about in here I think. So thanks if you participated.

    And if you participated and were just stupid with your answers, well, guess what, science marched on anyway despite you.
    Flat | Top-Level Comments Only
    sycamour: (✰ shock)

    [personal profile] sycamour 2020-06-03 09:06 am (UTC)(link)
    [!!!!]

    Ah, what an intriguing point! You're right! It's almost as if they are unbalanced, without a fourth blessing!

    [he has no idea what this could mean, but just try and stop him hurtling down this trail!]

    Which lines up exactly with the results of the survey, almost...Sanguis/Iris and Cordis/Iris make up the bulk of the pairings, while there is only one lonely Sanguis/Cordis pairing! It would make sense, if we use your definitions...two 'independent' blessings that might struggle to work together as a couple!

    This is fascinating, Jotaro!
    starmark: (WARM ☆ gotta sneak a little taste)

    [personal profile] starmark 2020-06-05 11:46 pm (UTC)(link)
    [WHOOPS there goes his slick anonymity but you know what, who even cares, he's got all the street cred he needs having impressed an Actual Professor.]

    Maybe that's why Cordises would work best as a same-couple pairing, too. Because they're both self-focused, so their satisfaction isn't dependent on someone else...or something.

    Maybe that's the next step? Run the same-pairing survey and see if the results pan out?
    sycamour: (✰ joy)

    [personal profile] sycamour 2020-06-06 04:58 am (UTC)(link)
    I think that would be an excellent idea! It's a natural next step, no? Personally, I'm incredibly curious about the existence of any Sanguis/Sanguis or Iris/Iris pairings, and how their mutual blessing affects the balance of their relationship!

    [...

    ah]

    Although I suppose we can't really ask the network to tell us their intimate relationship troubles, can we? Even if it is in the name of science, that would be a little bit rude!
    starmark: (PROUD ☆ my daughter's such a badass)

    [personal profile] starmark 2020-06-06 05:13 am (UTC)(link)
    Why not? I don't care about being rude.
    sycamour: (✰ bienvenue au kalos!)

    [personal profile] sycamour 2020-06-06 10:18 am (UTC)(link)
    You might not, but your potential respondents might, my lad. And we want to ensure we get the best data possible - you attract more Combees with honey rather than vinegar, after all!

    So perhaps we can aim to obtain data that talks about negative same-blessing relationship experiences, but frame it in such a way that we do not accidentally offend someone who could provide us with a particularly excellent response! What do you think?
    starmark: (BEHIND ☆ is he posing in a parked car)

    [personal profile] starmark 2020-06-07 09:28 pm (UTC)(link)
    Oh.

    [OH THAT'S RIGHT the people responding to his surveys have feelings. Right. Yes. Right.]

    Sure, I...guess that would make more sense. How would you frame it, though?
    sycamour: (✰ :>)

    [personal profile] sycamour 2020-06-08 06:32 am (UTC)(link)
    [A wild teachable moment appeared!]

    Let's break it down. We want to focus on potential relationship problems, but don't want people to feel like we're asking them to spill their interpersonal drama to the network. Anonymity for respondents is obvious, but for the questions...

    ...how about something like 'Does your relationship undergo any changes when your moon is active? Positive changes or negative changes? Could you elaborate on your answer to the above?' etc. What do you think?
    starmark: (POUT ☆ not enough yare in all the world)

    [personal profile] starmark 2020-06-09 10:10 pm (UTC)(link)
    I mean. A lot of people had no problem putting their relationship problems all over the network the last time.

    ...But.

    I guess I can see how your way would get better results.
    sycamour: (✰ oho)

    [personal profile] sycamour 2020-06-10 09:14 am (UTC)(link)
    It might ensure we get more than just those keen to air their dirty laundry, if I may be blunt. A diverse sample pool is always important, after all!
    Flat | Top-Level Comments Only