4 ms·

A/B testing is not the same thing as manipulating content based on negative/positive connotation and tracking user emotion change as a result. They're conceptu

by aroch 12y ago

A/B testing is not the same thing as manipulating content based on negative/positive connotation and tracking user emotion change as a result. They're conceptually similar but the resulting change in user expression is not. A/B testing is optimizing your site and user interactions with it, Facebook's experiment is trying to change a users interactions with the world. I would be just as upset if it were Google or my local grocer.

res0nat0r 12y ago
Sure it is. All advertising is manipulating user emotion, and A/B testing different advertising methods / button layouts on your site to improve conversions is one such use. If this is something that upsets you I suggest being upset at every commercial on the radio / newspaper / tv / billboard that you're unfortunately exposed to every day.
- aroch 12y ago
  People know ads are trying to manipulate them, they don't know that Facebook is actively trying to make them feel happier or sadder. Just because two things are similar does not make them morally equivalent. People have been calling out various bad practices in conversion: http://darkpatterns.org/ http://darkpatterns.org/
  - res0nat0r 12y ago
    Emotional manipulation happens every day in all kinds of fields other than advertising, I wouldn't refer to all of these as "dark patterns."
    - kaoD 12y ago
      > Emotional manipulation happens every day in all kinds of fields other than advertising So it's not bad because everyone else does it?
- teaneedz 12y ago
  At the end of the day, it does boil down to how users feel, but legit A/B seeks better features, improved user-experience, or identifying something better. The tech community, developers and data folks need to understand that all A/B is not equal. If we allow FB (or OKC) to pass off their ill-thought psych experiments as normal A/B or similar day-to-day product testing, we lower the UE bar. It has also been pointed out elsewhere that this particular study was/is illegal, violating certain state laws on Common Rule practice regardless of funding source. I hope that board members and the C-suite take a new leadership role to educate their teams as to what acceptable and legal A/B should look like.
thisGuysAccount 12y ago
I agree that A/B testing is not the same thing. A real-world comparison of the two different types of experiments: Grocer wants to see the effect of a product demo's effect on sales. They have a worker offer a product sample, then recommend a pairing of products vs offering a coupon for that product. A/B testing. Grocer wants to see the effect of a product's demo on the customer's emotions. He has the demo worker gripe about their boss, or talking positively about the community, then asks the cashiers for followup feedback on the smalltalk at their counters. One of these is OK. The other is seedy.

by aroch 12y ago

res0nat0r 12y ago

Sure it is. All advertising is manipulating user emotion, and A/B testing different advertising methods / button layouts on your site to improve conversions is one such use. If this is something that upsets you I suggest being upset at every commercial on the radio / newspaper / tv / billboard that you're unfortunately exposed to every day.

aroch 12y ago
People know ads are trying to manipulate them, they don't know that Facebook is actively trying to make them feel happier or sadder. Just because two things are similar does not make them morally equivalent. People have been calling out various bad practices in conversion: http://darkpatterns.org/ http://darkpatterns.org/
- res0nat0r 12y ago
  Emotional manipulation happens every day in all kinds of fields other than advertising, I wouldn't refer to all of these as "dark patterns."
  - kaoD 12y ago
    > Emotional manipulation happens every day in all kinds of fields other than advertising So it's not bad because everyone else does it?
teaneedz 12y ago
At the end of the day, it does boil down to how users feel, but legit A/B seeks better features, improved user-experience, or identifying something better. The tech community, developers and data folks need to understand that all A/B is not equal. If we allow FB (or OKC) to pass off their ill-thought psych experiments as normal A/B or similar day-to-day product testing, we lower the UE bar. It has also been pointed out elsewhere that this particular study was/is illegal, violating certain state laws on Common Rule practice regardless of funding source. I hope that board members and the C-suite take a new leadership role to educate their teams as to what acceptable and legal A/B should look like.

thisGuysAccount 12y ago

I agree that A/B testing is not the same thing. A real-world comparison of the two different types of experiments: Grocer wants to see the effect of a product demo's effect on sales. They have a worker offer a product sample, then recommend a pairing of products vs offering a coupon for that product. A/B testing. Grocer wants to see the effect of a product's demo on the customer's emotions. He has the demo worker gripe about their boss, or talking positively about the community, then asks the cashiers for followup feedback on the smalltalk at their counters. One of these is OK. The other is seedy.