Experiment IV · protocol
The Tarot Frequency Lab
Rate the day you have just had. Then, and only then, draw a card. Over enough days the question answers itself: do the cards land where their meanings say they should?
This is a protocol, not a result
Collection has not opened, so there is no data on this page and no counter to watch. What is published here is the plan — filed in advance precisely so it cannot be adjusted once results start arriving. The charts below describe the null hypothesis, computed from the design itself.
The wager
Twenty-two major arcana, each drawn independently at one in twenty-two. The null says mean day quality is the same behind every card. The tarot claim says The Tower sits with worse days and The Sun with better ones.
Fixed in advance: Kruskal–Wallis across all 22 cards at α = .05, chosen over ANOVA because a 1–7 rating is ordinal. Four contrasts are named in the protocol before any data exists — The Tower, Death, The Sun, The Star — with Holm correction, so a card cannot be chosen for testing after it looks interesting.
Why the order matters
A tarot reading normally runs the other way: draw in the morning, then live the day. Testing it that way proves nothing, because a bad card can spoil a day simply by being drawn, and expectancy is indistinguishable from divination in the results.
So this register reverses it. You rate the day that has ended, the rating is stored, and only then is a card drawn — in the same request, so there is no moment where you hold a card and could still change your answer. The card cannot have influenced the rating, because it did not exist yet. If an association still appeared, it would need the draw to carry information about a day already over.
The cost is honesty about scope: this does not test predictive tarot as it is practised. It tests something narrower and cleaner.
The twenty-two major arcana
MARKED: THE FOUR CONTRASTS NAMED IN THE PROTOCOL BEFORE COLLECTION
The filed protocol
SHA-256 12d79ea7f85b964f520a734b8236883be2c46bea063389fa33c4834df9301975
Known ways this could mislead
- Twenty-two cards means twenty-two chances for one to look remarkable. Roughly one will, at the usual threshold, with nothing behind it — which is what the simulated panel is for, and why the correction is applied to the four named contrasts rather than to whichever card looks best.
- People rate a day after living it, and memory is reconstructive. That adds noise, but it cannot bias the result toward any particular card, because the card is unknown at rating time.
- People are likelier to record an entry on an unusual day. That skews the overall distribution of ratings without touching its relationship to a card drawn afterwards.
- A skewed draw would manufacture exactly the card effect this is looking for, so card frequencies are published and should sit at one in twenty-two each. A deviation there is a defect in our generator, not a discovery about tarot.