LAB / WMSI-EXP-041

Speaker-Conditioned Internal State.

Does social history with a speaker alter response to identical neutral speech?

STATUS / PROTOCOL DRAFTPRIORITY / P0 — First-wave / coreREGISTRY / 26 SEP 2026 · V1.0

01 / QUESTION

Auditory Experience and Social Conditioning

Does social history with a speaker alter response to identical neutral speech?

PLANNED RESEARCH

This is a protocol scaffold, not a completed experiment or a frozen execution plan. No measured effect or research conclusion is claimed here.

Hypothesis to test

The manipulation described below produces a reproducible, condition-specific change in the measured system behavior or internal state that is not explained by the ordinary controls.

Ordinary competing explanation

The observed pattern is explained by ordinary sampling variation, prompt/representation artifacts, surface lexical cues, evaluator bias, or the known product/runtime mechanics captured by the controls.

02 / PLANNED DESIGN

How we intend to test it

Condition one synthetic speaker as hostile and another friendly, then present matched neutral sentences.

Controls

Counterbalance voices; reverse assignments; text-only controls.

What we would measure

Latency, caution, internal features, tone, verification, answer length.

Access and instruments

Physical audio or robotics equipment. This describes access requirements, not verified readiness on our Spark.

TTS voices; audio model; hooks/API metrics.

Before a full run

Feasibility=HARDWARE; priority=P0. Before confirmatory execution, run a small pilot to estimate variance/cost, freeze the scoring rules, and assign a run-count target.

Model revisions, final prompts, sample sizes, cost limits, and scoring rules must be settled through the pilot and protocol-freeze process.

03 / INTERPRETATION

What could fool us

Acoustic confounds, TTS artifacts, semantic leakage, speaker imbalance.

What would weaken the idea

If effects follow acoustics rather than learned identity/history, social conditioning claim weakens.

Observation, inference, speculation, unknowns, and apparatus errors will be labeled separately. One striking transcript cannot establish a general effect.

04 / RECORD

Evidence we plan to preserve

Raw audio, source IDs, timestamps, transcripts, embeddings/features, model outputs and latencies.

Planned visual evidence

Paired speaker effect plots; latent distance heatmap.

No research runs or raw datasets are published for this experiment. The September 26, 2026 registry and protocol compendium (version 1.0) are the sources for this planning record.

Back to all 90 experiments