# Double Blind Testing HR



## Nancy Jocoy (Apr 19, 2006)

After the Casey Anthony case and a lively discussion at a recent HRD seminar we decided to "embrace" "Double Blind Testing" as defined by SWGDOG and have some comments after several goes with it.

It really IS different than Single Blind. Like it or not we can read the evaluator and maybe even the dog a good bit. When your evaluator does not know where the item is - they become your flanker and it is much more "real world". 

It is hard to explain; you would not think it different but it is........... Now I got a false indication doing EXACTLY the same thing I saw my teammate doing on his problem [HAHA] which was hovering over an area instead of moving on. 

Common training problem but how I had someone to articulate my strategy with who was seeing the same behaviors I was, had the same limitations, and "bought into" my logic.........interesting.........

It is worth a try. Really is different.


----------



## Jim Delbridge (Jan 27, 2010)

Just got back yesterday from Colorado....well 0100 this morning. On Saturday ,multiple dog teams requested I set them double blinds up. I explained to them that I'd set three areas up. Each area would be Zero-to-Three sources. One area was skeletal, one area was dental, and one area was tissue. They were instructed not to talk with each other until everyone had an opportunity to work the aeas. When a dog team was done, they came and got me. I went out to the area with that dog handler (dog was put up) and identified correct or incorrect flags. Dog handler had to tell me when they were done. If I pulled flags, they had the opportunity to re-work the area till they felt satisifed.

When I set up the dental, I wanted it to be fair, so I poured distilled water over the teeth that morning. The teeth were under a large rock with original debris in place. I poured what water I had left over three other rocks in the area.....One source. Several dogs checked water (very dry area) and their handlers talked themselves into flags.

The tissue area was void of any sources. One dog team worked it with two different dogs, one right after the other, and overall flagged five different locations. Like real life, the blank area was the hardest to walk away from. Handlers just want to place flags.

I was concerned they might be upset with me, but all the handlers learned a lot from their areas. Some were certified and some were not. All felt ready to deploy their dogs in real searches.

When you think your dog is ready to deploy, Double Blinds are the only way to go and the best way to fix any gotchas you've ignored OR (more likely) didn't know you had.



Jim Delbridge


----------



## Pete Stevens (Dec 16, 2010)

Double blinds is a great idea but at a minimum single blind is a must. I'm all for a third party eval for certifications. HR must have some really stinky training aids....I guess I shouldn't complain about my black tar being so rank.


----------



## David Frost (Mar 29, 2006)

Pete Stevens said:


> Double blinds is a great idea but at a minimum single blind is a must. I'm all for a third party eval for certifications. HR must have some really stinky training aids....I guess I shouldn't complain about my black tar being so rank.


I totally agree. One of the reasons people fight so much against the double blind is because they don't do honest single blind. For example, part of this years drug dog certification is 3 sets of 7 vehicles. One of the sets of vehicles is blank. The handlers know this going into the certification. What they don't know is which set of vehicles is blank. 

DFrost


----------

