First sentence experiment: study protocol

Define the decision

This page is a proposed research protocol, not a completed study or a report of findings. The decision is: Does a verified observation outperform a direct problem statement for a particular segment? The observation unit is one prospect whose source evidence is available. Define the population and owner before collecting records; do not substitute an available convenience dataset without documenting the change.

Work through the procedure

1. Keep the remaining body identical. Save evidence for every observation and reject claims that cannot be verified.
2. Assign at random only after determining both treatments are appropriate. Track claim accuracy as a guardrail alongside replies.
3. Before collection, write the primary outcome, observation window, exclusion rules and stopping conditions. Preserve excluded observations with a reason rather than quietly removing them.
4. Pilot the procedure with fictional or owned test data, resolve ambiguous fields, and freeze a dated protocol version before the main run.

Worked example

The following is a synthetic example for this procedure, not a customer result or performance benchmark.

A: verified hiring observation; B: direct handoff problem; shared offer and CTA
Suggested record fields: observation_id, condition, evidence_reference, outcome, exclusion_reason, reviewer, protocol_version
Status: illustrative record only; no study has been run for this page.

Read the result

Report factual error incidence and qualified interest together. More replies do not excuse unsupported personalization. Keep the numerator, denominator and missing evidence visible. If the available observations cannot answer the registered question, report that limitation rather than selecting a more favorable metric after collection.

Collect the evidence

Observation unit: prospect.

Verified source evidence that makes either treatment appropriate for each eligible prospect.

Determine eligibility before assignment; keep the rest of the body fixed.

Analysis: Qualified replies alongside unsupported-claim incidence; neither metric hides the other.

Download the JSON collection template under Source references. Set an owner, eligibility rules, outcome definition, observation window and sample justification before collecting records. Templates contain no participant data or results; keep original private records outside the public website.

Check before moving on

1. Name the person responsible for collection and review.
2. Check that the evidence can be inspected without exposing private messages or credentials.
3. Record deviations from the protocol and analyze their possible effect.
4. Retain a dated, redacted evidence worksheet with the final interpretation.

Limits and next action

An observation available only for some companies changes the eligible population. Do not compare that subset with an unrelated control. Publish results only after the evidence, method and limitations have been reviewed. This protocol provides no benchmark, expected lift or completed-study claim.

Source: Method or workflow reference