Glanding by Occasion, Not Detectably by Mood: A 28-Day Secretion Diary Study of 371 Adult Residents of Chiark Orbital, 1692–1693 CE

1. Introduction

Few features of Culture pan-human biology are as familiar, or as little studied, as the drug glands. Almost every adult can secrete compounds at will, and most do so as casually as they eat. Snap, the best known, is a waking compound, taken for alertness at the start of the day. Among the many others, Sharp Blue is reported to aid concentration in games and problem-solving, and Quicken, by its users' account, to give the sense that time has slowed around a demanding task (Quandral, 1668 CE).

Everyday use is poorly documented for a reason rooted in Culture custom. A Hub could in principle observe the neurochemistry of every resident of its Orbital, but reading a citizen's mind without consent is among the gravest breaches of Culture manners, and Hubs are generally understood not to keep records of their residents' inner states (Brashend, 1640 CE). What is known about glanding therefore comes from anecdote, from pharmacological work on single compounds, and from studies of unusual users. Ordinary adults on an ordinary Orbital have not been systematically asked.

Two readings of glanding are common. On the first, secretion is a tool, used to meet the demands of particular occasions: a hard game, a long project, a party. On the second, it is mainly a way of regulating mood, used to lift a bad day or to soften a difficult one. Each predicts something a diary can test. If the first reading is right, use should rise on days of demanding activity. If the second is right, it should rise when, or after, a person's mood is lower than usual for them.

We asked three questions. How often do adults gland, and which compounds do they choose? How is secretion distributed across the day and across activities? And does secretion follow occasions, low mood, or both?

2. Methods

The study ran on Chiark Orbital over twelve months from early 1692 CE. With the consent of Chiark Hub, 600 adults were drawn at random from its resident index, which lists residents by location on the Orbital and not by any personal characteristic (Chiark Orbital Hub Records, 1691 CE). Each was invited once, by message, and told that the Hub would not see their diary. Of the 600, 412 consented (68.7%), 161 declined and 27 did not reply. Participants started on staggered dates to spread the diaries across the year.

Each participant kept a diary for 28 days. For every secretion they noticed, they recorded the compound, the time and the activity under way, chosen from a fixed list. Compounds were coded as Snap, Sharp Blue, Quicken or other, with a free description for other compounds, since Culture pan-humans can produce far more than three. Each evening participants rated their mood on a seven-point scale (Tarvell & Umbrin, 1602 CE) and recorded whether the day had included a game or sustained project, and whether it had included hosting or a social event. At the end of the diary, participants answered one open question on their reasons for glanding or not glanding. Diary methods of this kind have been used on Orbitals for other questions (Movonne, 1679 CE).

We analysed participants who completed at least 20 diary days. Proportions carry Wilson 95% confidence intervals. The daily count of secretion episodes was modelled by negative binomial regression with a random intercept for each participant, which suits overdispersed counts nested within people (Esslin, 1650 CE). Mood was scored so that a higher value means lower mood and was centred on each participant's own mean, so that its coefficient answers the question of whether people gland more after their own worse evenings. Model 1 entered a game or project day, a hosted or social day, the previous evening's mood and age in centuries. Model 2 replaced the previous evening's mood with the same day's, to test for glanding on the low day itself. As a sensitivity analysis we refitted Model 1 without the participants who secreted nothing.

3. Results

Of the 412 who consented, 371 (90.0%, 95% CI 86.8–92.6%) completed at least 20 diary days, and these form the analysis sample. They logged 9,914 of the 10,388 possible diary days (95.4%) and 18,814 secretion episodes. Their ages ran from 21 to 347 years, with a median of 112.

Snap was the most widely used compound. Over the 28 days, 297 of 371 participants (80.1%, 95% CI 75.7–83.8%) secreted it at least once, 158 (42.6%, 37.7–47.7%) Sharp Blue and 71 (19.1%, 15.5–23.4%) Quicken. Other compounds were reported by 204 participants (55.0%, 49.9–60.0%) under more than sixty descriptions. Thirty-eight participants (10.2%, 7.6–13.7%) secreted nothing during the study, and 27 of them (71.1%) gave a preference for being unaltered as their reason. The median participant logged 1.6 episodes per diary day (IQR 0.7–2.8).

Secretion followed the shape of the day. Of 6,904 Snap episodes, 4,902 (71.0%) fell within two hours of waking. Sharp Blue was concentrated in games and problem-solving, which accounted for 1,484 of its 2,318 episodes (64.0%). Quicken was rare, with 402 episodes, and almost all were recorded during a game, a performance or a demanding physical activity. The remaining 9,190 episodes were of other compounds.

Occasions predicted secretion and mood did not (Table 1). In Model 1, episode counts were 62% higher on game or project days (IRR 1.62, 95% CI 1.41–1.86, p < .001) and 31% higher on hosted or social days (IRR 1.31, 1.15–1.49, p < .001), and each additional century of age was associated with 12% fewer episodes (IRR 0.88, 0.79–0.98, p = .02). A participant's own lower mood the previous evening was not associated with more secretion (IRR 1.03 per point, 0.95–1.11, p = .46). In Model 2, same-day mood was not associated either (IRR 1.06, 0.98–1.15, p = .15), and the other estimates barely moved. Without the 38 participants who secreted nothing, Model 1 gave IRRs of 1.58 (1.37–1.82) for game or project days, 1.29 (1.13–1.48) for social days, 1.03 (0.95–1.12) for previous-evening mood and 0.90 (0.80–1.01) for age.

4. Discussion

In this population glanding behaves like a tool. It is common, it follows the time of day, and it rises on the days that demand something: games, projects and social occasions. We found no sign that people gland more on, or after, their own worse days. That is weaker than proof that mood plays no part. The upper bound of the previous-evening estimate, carried across the full scale from best to worst mood, would allow secretion to be up to about 1.9 times higher, so a moderate mood effect remains possible. What the diaries show clearly is the effect of occasions, and they give no positive evidence for the mood account.

That fits the character of the Culture as its members describe it. Low mood in a society without want is rarely a problem of circumstance, and Culture adults have many other remedies for it, from company to a change of Orbital. On this evidence the glands are kept for meeting the demands of a busy day. The age gradient points the same way: older adults gland less, and several wrote in their closing answer that they had come to prefer their unassisted responses.

One participant in ten secreted nothing, about half as many as used Quicken. Most of them described this as a preference, and it appears to be an ordinary Culture choice, perhaps commoner in some lineages and settings than others (Crazdet, 1655 CE). It deserves study in its own right.

5. Limitations

A diary records only what participants notice. Brief or habitual secretions, especially of Snap on waking, are likely to have been missed on some days, so our rates are best read as lower bounds. The seven-point mood scale is coarse, and a mood effect confined to very low days could have escaped it. Secretion during a day may also lift that evening's rating, which would hide a same-day association; the previous-evening model avoids this problem but tests only a one-day lag.

Chiark is one Orbital, and its residents may differ from those of other Orbitals and of General Systems Vehicles. The 188 people invited who declined or did not reply, and the 41 who did not complete, may also differ from participants. Finally, a diary study cannot address dependence, tolerance or long-term effects; those questions need designs this one could not provide.