Hypotheses to Test

Only the most promising hypotheses are worthy of experimentation, because we have very finite resources and a limited amount of time to solve the problem. How promising a hypothesis is can be objectively determined by the logical support it has in the model of understanding, and if it was true, how big a difference it would make in that model and further decisions based on the model, such as how to best push on the system's high leverage points (HLPs). This is why our list of hypotheses to test is organized by HLPs. Later it may also be organized by solution elements.

The first two HLPs were identified in The Dueling Loops of the Political Powerplace model. The third one, quality of political decision making, is not in the above simplified model of the dueling loops, but is in the full model, which is in the manuscript to A Model in Crisis.

Notes - The Truth Test and Corruption Ratings are introduced in the Dueling Loops paper mentioned above. They are candidate solution elements. This list of hypotheses is deliberately being kept short to help us to focus on the few things that can make the big difference.

HLP 1. Raising the general ability to detect political deception

According to the dueling loops model this is the highest leverage point of them all. Thus it is the HLP that needs testing first. There are many factors (independent variables) that might be able to increase ability to detect political deception (the dependent variable). Our hypothesis is that factors exist in the human system that if changed will increase the general ability to detect political deception. A corollary hypothesis is that this will cause voters to, on the average, elect "better" politicians.

Experimentation will show which factors exist and how to best use them. Some of the factors that we suspect will make a large difference are:

A. Even a very brief exposure to the Truth Test can raise a person's ability to detect political deception.

B. The more of the Truth Test a person learns, the higher their ability to detect political deception will be.

C. Even a small aspect of Corruption Ratings, such as a relative measure of quantity of financial donations to a politician from special interest groups, can raise people's general ability to detect deception.

D. The more complete a Corruption Ratings is, the more effective it is.

E. The longer Corruption Ratings are done over time, the more effective they are.

F. The perceived bias in the rating organization has a major influence on how well a Corruption Rating or series of ratings works.

HLP 2. Raising general repulsion to corruption

(To be examined later.)

HLP 3. Raising the quality of political decision making

(To be examined later.)