Seems likely to be a placebo. You have a vested interest in it working, admit its not based on any sort of science, and one of the setup steps is to overcome distraction (which is the problem that’s trying to be solved).
Fundamentally, if it works for the OP, who the hell cares?
And how would you even double-blind test this anyway?
Get lights that either start fast and slow down or blink at speeds that randomly change then use serial numbers to track which lights are which, but send them out at random to test subjects?
I like the approach though, it would be a reasonable control condition (assuming that the 60bpm is a core part of the effect).
Maybe. Generally you'd do a manipulation check at the end to ensure that people couldn't identify what condition they were in.
Additionally, that's single blind rather than double blind.
And more generally, my philosophy (as someone with a PhD in the placebo effect) is that harnessing any expectancy/placebo effects in one's personal life is totally reasonable, and if it works for people and there's low risk of harm then more power to them.
We shouldn't gatekeep potentially useful personal treatments based on the gold standard. It's kinda the medical equivalent of YAGNI, I suppose.
He sees a correlation, correlations are amongst the easiest thing to test.
Causation is the difficult one
Mind you, pointing out placebo could be useful if the OP made the claim that their solution could cure a disease or something (such claims could discourage someone from getting effective treatment).
You are likely aware of this already, but for others readers, it's important to know that placebos are still effective even when you know they are placebo. The term is "open-label placebo".
I wouldn't be surprised if you felt better even before you took your first dose; I can imagine you started feeling better just having a prescription in hand.
One of the biggest parts of placebo is going through the motions, whether you believe it or not. The original commentor appears to be aware that their approach may not have any scientific basis so mentioning the potential of placebo is fine.
Oddly enough, non-musical sounds (like birds or cars) don't affect me at all. I think it's the complex pattern-matching in music that is a problem for me. Of course, that's also what makes it so delightful to listen to.
YES, it can be the placebo effect, but still placebo can works wonders ; )
I detailed better aspects on questions above, also not doing it commercially or claiming it can be helpful for anyone other than me.
In placebo, one needs to trust it will work (or see a figure of authority to believe it does), in my case I wasn't expecting much and got not far from it on v.1 (software), but by v.3 (hardware) I was surprised and used to it.
So, I'm happy to share it here FREE ; )
I detailed better aspects on a question above,
Placebo need you to trust it works (or see a figure of authority to believe it does), in my case I expect nothing and got not much on v.1 (software) by v.3 (hardware) it is surprising.
; )