EDITED POSTMORTEM (attempt #1):
The Curious Subject Meets A Variable: A new psychiatrist has entered the experiment. They came (highly) recommended by the Doctor to confirm/deny any tentative assignment of letters to the Couch-Dweller.
Significance: A new aspect of knowledge pertaining to the experiment is now available. The ability to compare and contrast between two very capable Doctors provides an entirely new bulk of information to be deduced and discovered. Not unlike a professional-observer venn diagram, several common aspects are bound to coincide and thus one can distinguish between personal flare behavior and expected/required behavior.
For the sake of identification, the original Doctor will continue to be Doctor and the newly introduced Doctor will be referred to as the Guest. Not terribly creative, however it serves the purpose of distinction. It is also acknowledged that the differences observed may stem from the differences in the nature of the sessions as well as altered behavior which the Couch-Dweller displays. Sadly, the Curious Subject is not inclined to separate between those.
The following is a single example of the multifaceted and fascinating aspects which this variable has presented:
Rhythm of Conversation:
Doctor—Moments of silence tend to punctuate the flow of communication, but this may also be perpetuated by the Curious Subject and the Doctor both using the silence to observe. The moments with no conversation are found to be oddly reassuring and they virtually ensure that the Couch-Dweller does not become rattled enough to shut down. When speaking, the words come easily and are exceedingly well selected and articulated however never is perceived as condescending. The tone is typically friendly and purposeful although it must be said that the inflections betray any hint of uncertainty or insecurity. Topics are introduced gradually and then delved into with analytical vigor, scouring each scrap of information not distinguishing between verbal and nonverbal signals.
Guest—Much more rapid conversation which has no pauses yet the more frivolous topics seem to function in the same way a silence would. The session was the first one, so it was to be expected that maximum information acquisition was the goal. Topics were skimmed over rapidly, broad strokes which were not (at this time) questioning for deeper significance. The selection of words gave the impression that eloquence was (un?)intentionally avoided to create a more informal atmosphere and streamline the interaction. Only years of experience could have spawned the tone of voice which is professionally efficient but draped in kindness and patience, betraying nothing that the Guest does not desire to reveal.
