Ludicrous as the title may appear to the layman of psychology, it is nevertheless a fact that human behavior can be accurately predicted by the way a person reacts to or consumes Froot Loops. In fact, many authorities in the field of behavioral psychology, especially the distinguished B. F. Skinner, have shown great interest in the Floydian theory of Froot Loops as a behavioral determinant in humans. I will first attempt to explain in this paper what led to this hypothesis and then give some examples of its application in everyday life.

It all began one morning at college.

I had just sat down in the cafeteria to enjoy a leisurely breakfast before classes when an extremely large student plopped down beside me. I continued eating but soon this student's actions caught my eye. Six one-serving boxes of Froot Loops were being unceremoniously dumped into a large bowl along with a liberal helping of milk. "Must be hungry," I mused. The spoon, resembling more a front-end loader in cubic volume, was plunged into the psychedelic conglomeration, then made a short journey to the two lips situated one inch from the lip of the bowl. Those lips opened wide to admit the `spoon' and then smacked quickly up and down, then side to side with the speed of a trip-hammer, doing almost everything that could be done with lips without being booked for a felony. These convolutions continued for the space of at least one second when the lips were interrupted by the second spoonful, which they seemed obligated to envelop. The sounds, resembling a low-flying 747, quickly rose in decibels. The student was seemingly unaware of the noises, eating with total disregard to the ears of the audience, which comprised half of campus. My only respite was when she paused twice to snort in a breath.

After she had waddled out of the cafeteria, I contemplated deeply about her behavior, but was unable to make a definite conclusion as to how she would react in other situations.

But, as fate would have it, while ushering at the football game that next weekend I once again spotted her. Her behavior was just as disruptive as I had first experienced. She was flinging tortilla shells with wild abandon, shot-putting large Sprites into the crowd, and shouting quasi-obscenities at the players.

From the data I gathered from these two sightings, I dared to formulate a hypothesis. Modestly , I named it the Floydian theory. I was ridiculed to no end by my peers, but I persevered in proving the validity of the theory. I will now proceed by showing how this theory can be used in our everyday lives to determine the behavioral traits of any human.

First, a habitual introvert can be easily recognized by the Floydian method. A person you suspect to be severely introverted is observed taking his first bite of Froot Loops, but upon hearing the crunches resounding across the room, he will turn a nice red color and then c-a-r-e-f-u-l-l-y put the Froot Loops up next to the roof of his mouth and quietly and desperately suck on them until they dissolve into a swallowable state. He is hesitant to take another bite, but to avoid embarrassment by not having his bowl cleaned of all food, he will, despite the sure result of the roof of his mouth being rubbed raw by the rough edges, continue sucking them spoonful by spoonful, maintaining the noise level of a person eating Cream of Wheat. To verify your observations beyond a doubt, you approach and ask how breakfast was. If a wan smile from blood-flecked lips is his only response, he can be safely classed as being, behaviorally, severely introverted.

Or, say a lady is observed eating first the orange, then the yellow, and finally the purple loops in spoonful increments of exactly seven, dabbing delicately at her lips with a napkin after every bite. What behavioral conclusions can be drawn? Using the Floydian method, it is clear that this is an extremely fastidious person, very prim, liking her environment in perfect order. Odds are that the subject has a fetish about cleanliness and/or is your mother.

Finally, the Floydian method can be used to judge the intelligence of the subject by gauging their reaction to Froot Loops. Undoubtedly the most intelligent subjects avoid Froot Loops like the bubonic plague. The mere sight of a Loop can drench them in a cold sweat, their teeth crossing their nerves, praying fervently for divine intervention. Their reaction, as defined by the F.M., is one born out of reason. They reason that while Froot Loops can be part of a nutritious breakfast of eggs, juice, toast and milk, eggs, juice, toast and milk are infinitely more nutritious without them at one-tenth the calories.

But what are some practical uses of the Floydian method? Let me give one hypothetical situation. A man would no longer ask his prospective spouse out to dinner to check her out, but rather, invite her to an intimate breakfast for two, including Froot Loops on the menu. By watching her closely he can decide the plausibility of such a union. But as a note of caution--itis considered wise to have an extra spoon resembling a front-end loader, just in case the unexpected occurs.

It should be clear now that the Floydian theory of forecasting behavior by the usage of a simple carbohydrate fix (Froot Loops) is a viable theory worthy of close examination and scrutiny. Just as Dr. Skinner was ridiculed for his studies of pigeons, I too have been ridiculed, but as my theory receives greater attention, its status in the psychological community is assured.

© 1987, Louis A. Floyd