Thanks john, prefer names meself.
Hence, no need for terry
J is there.
In the few time that we did it, I can't remember any blind tests resulting in a difference to sighted.
Ah, so the jaw dropping night and day differences were still present. And I spose the wife could hear i making cookies in the kitchen?
Anyway, all I can say is that those results are completely different to my experience. That such huge obvious completely unmistakeable differences were present tends to oend a bit of credence to the theory that one of them must have been broken..given that they are designed to do the same task so should be more similar than dissimilar.
Are we talking about a rigorous, academically acceptable, statistically significant DBT. Could you give a link to this test as such tests are usually only performed for the purpose of serious research & publication?
So you want to move the goalposts?? Serious research and publication? In what austere mag would that be? Which academic body would be interested?
No. Certainly serious in that we wanted to do the best possible job we could with the knowledge and resources at hand.
The attendants were limited to those who turned up, roughlky a dozen if memory serves. I must say that now we would not get anywhere near those numbers...once bitten and all that stuff...the curious subjectivists are far fewer in number than before.
I think the point was that perhaps a better method of doing auditioning is to live with the device for a suitable amount of time so all the different styles of listening are used.
STILL absoluetly
no acknowledgement of any bias when knowledge is present??
As I said before, all the factors that you mention could lead one to psychologically favouring the null result i.e there is no discernible difference between the DUTs
Ahh, got it. Is that a REAL null result (ie could not hear any difference) of a lying one (could hear a difference, but hey just say no anyway).
How do you tell the two apart? We throw out any 'no difference' cause it shows a bias to the null result? What if they were the same unit?? (A perfectly valid sequence is AAABABBA)
Now, here is an example of the unexamined aspects of your argument. You mentioned stress etc etc during tests, 'tell them they need to say what they heard' etc.
Ok, like your example, there are obvious differences in sound say. ALL can hear it (or the guy thinks he hears it easily, and so assumes all else can too)..he is going to say 'no difference' when he thinks it is clear to all??
The whole point about blinded is that you have to call the shots as you hear em, or not as the case may be.
So you don't have to know which one is the expensive device - the fact that the cheap device "sounds" the same means it's a "giant killer" (if there's a top rated device in the test).
I mean, lets' be real, there are many factors, too numerous to mention. I'm just saying that sightedness may well not be the most important & if you claim it is then you need to prove what your claim is based on!
All those reasons you give that shows the flaw of DBT (wanting a giant killer), can you explain to us how they are somehow absent when sighted??
A useful 'tool' when examining your own arguments is to flip them, see how they apply to the converse point.
