News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Young 'pranksters' skewed landmark sexuality study by saalweachter on Friday January 24, 2014 @10:19PM (#7119695)
I don't know what you or the OP are thinking of, but it's worth pointing out that the placebo effect is not just a phenomenon in the patients' minds; it can also be a phenomenon in doctors' minds.

In brief, any time you have a subjective measurement (for instance, the experimenter assigns a number from 1 to 5 based on how "distressed" the mice -- or human patients -- look), that subjective measurement can be subtly biased. So if the experimenter doesn't blind his experiments properly, you can see a placebo effect in animal studies.

It is appropriate to refer to these studies as double or triple blind because the single blind usually refers to the patient.

  Single blind: patients do not know which group they are in
  Double blind: experimenters do not know the group identities
  Triple blind: overseeing committees do not know the group identities
So animal studies can be assumed to be single blind by default, and become double-blind when the experimenters do not know the group identities.
Re:Young 'pranksters' skewed landmark sexuality study by Crito on Friday January 24, 2014 @10:58PM (#7119787)
My understanding is that the "placebo effect" doesn't refer to biased numbers or reporting, but exists when everything is measured correctly. It is objectively there, not a screwy result.
Re:Young 'pranksters' skewed landmark sexuality study by yaddayadda on Friday January 24, 2014 @11:09PM (#7119810)
Re:Young 'pranksters' skewed landmark sexuality study by saalweachter on Friday January 24, 2014 @11:34PM (#7119866)
"Biased" is probably a loaded word. I think I may have implied intent without meaning to.

But basically, the placebo effect only exists for subjective measurements. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Placebo#Mechanism_of_the_effect) If something exists only in subjective measurements and not objective measurements... I'll let you draw your own inference.