From: "jeffrey E." <[email protected]> To: David Sauvage Cc: gino yu Subject: Re: Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2016 12:52:39 +0000 I greatly appreciatei the honesty, I dont think will work with pictures. but might work face to face. if it will work at all. if so I would try 10 women, and ten names. . you willl need to touch each one. . On Sun, Aug 14, 2016 at 10:32 PM, David Sauvage < > wrote: Hi Jeffrey and Gino, Earlier today, I sat down with 15 pictures and 15 names and tried to match them. It turned out to be quite a struggle -- primarily because people were very similar. For instance, I'd have descriptions like this: Shy but relatively happy on the outside Filled with frustration and anxiety Burning with rage deep down But out of the 15 people, that could vaguely describe 3 or 4 them. So my matching ending up looking like a convoluted chart. What I concluded was that I need a bit more help designing this experiment. Ideally, rather than matching 15 names to pictures, I have a bunch of binary decisions (A or B). One would expect me to get 50% right. IF the people are emotionally different enough (happy v. sad, for instance) I hypothesize I will do considerably better than chance. Does that make sense? I have started to go down this road with my friend at NYU. Happy to discuss with Gino as well. And of course, happy to submit to MRI machines and the like to figure what's happening on that end. Open to any and all thoughts. Science, clearly, is not my gift. Very best, David On Tue, Aug 9, 2016 at 1:49 PM, David Sauvage < > wrote: Hi Jeffrey, Sony it took a beat to respond. This weekend, when I have space and time, I'll ask a friend to lay out some pictures and names and see how I do. And I'll report back what I learn. I've been thinking about this for a while -- and I do feel we ultimately need a more rigorous experiment. But I like your idea, at least to start, of just giving it a good and seeing. Great meeting you. David EFTA00821464