Me and my perception

[terryj]

When did it morph into not having expectation bias?

People start moving the goalposts...without any admission that usually it was because the shaky grounds have been exposed.

And when did it change into 'not having any' rather than being unaffected by it, expectation or otherwise.

Ok, so now it is you do not have 'expectation' bias, can we conclude that you do have bias of other descriptions? Are you also immune to them or do they affect you?

This is an interesting area, what does someone do when they are aware they have a bias?? How does it affect them in their everyday decision process. I mean it has to doesn't it?

Take the word bias, and someones acknowledgement that they know they are biased in a certain way. Firstly the word, bias. In other words, they are aware that their thoughts in this area are irrational, ie based on 'something' that they acknowledge does not warrant the conclusions.

They are an employer, and acknowledge they have a bias against a racial group, skin colour, religion or sexual orientation (either for or against mind). They are aware of that bias (which has as part of it's definition that it is unfair), and want to act as if 'they are unaffected by bias'. So which way does he jump?? And no matter which way he jumps, how can he then believe that his decision, whatever it was, was unaffected by bias? The decision HAD to be affected by bias, he deliberately decided to act a certain way because he was biased.

Interesting area. I mean he is to be lauded for the attempt to 'not have bias affect his decisions', but the nature of the beast means it is basically impossible.

But it gets more interesting...ask the skinhead whether or not his view on the jews or inferior races are a bias. Of course it is not a bias! It is a fact, or his justified opinion based on being able to see the truth. Who would ever admit bias? By it's very definition. An irrational unsupported opinion unworthy of being held. Who would ever admit they were biased? It's not part of the human nature sadly.

The best we can hope for, and one I fervently hope I achieve, is when a bias is pointed out to examine it dispassionately and see where it (the 'objection') is valid and where it is not and learn from that.

Self awareness if I may.

But what of unconscious bias?? One that is NOT known exists or admitted? If we are unaware of it's existence, how then are we to counter it's effects? And even if we could, impossible I know due to the very meaning of the concept, we are straight back into the conundrum outlined above.

 

[opus111]

I am lost here .. If you don't expect anything (let's forget about the term bias for now) .. then why would you swap PS or DAC chip or whatever?

I swap things when I've formed a hypothesis for what might result in a change to the sound. Here I swapped to a linear PSU because of a hypothesis that common-mode noise results in poorer SQ. So whereas I had an SMPSU originally, I swapped to a linear PSU. Testing a hypothesis does not imply there's an expectation. There's only expectation when I want my hypothesis to be correct in running the experiment. I might want that because I'm too lazy to think of another one, for example.

How to know there was expectation? A particular result of an experiment is disappointing. Where there's disappointment with an experiment's outcome there most surely was expectation about the result of it.

 

[mep]

When I listen to different components, I expect to hear a difference and I guess we can call that “expectation bias.” However, I have learned not to automatically assume the change will be for the better. I would like to think I can be neutral about what I expect from a new piece of gear being inserted into my system. I don’t assume/expect that the new gear will be better.

The latest case in point would be the Mytek Stereo 192 DAC I just bought. I ‘hoped’ it would better than my E-MU 0404 DAC, but I think that is different than expecting it to be better because it cost more. In this case, the differences between the two DACs was so profound that it was a no brainer.

 

[opus111]

When did it morph into not having expectation bias?

False premise - rather like the question 'When did you stop beating your wife?'.

 

[amirm]

No, its an observation that I'm not subject to it.

No, it is a belief that you are not subject to it. For it to be a *valid* observation, it would need some kind of proof. I offered one. Which is to run the same test blind. Since you are sure that your observation is correct, then removal of what was not there -- i.e. bias -- should not change anything. Despite how little work it takes to do that, certainly less than typing all of these posts , you don't want to do that. To me, that is not logical.

Take police Driving Under the Influence (DUI) tests. The person almost always observes that they are not drunk. The police doesn't take their word for it and instead tests them using machines or physical tests. By your way of thinking they should just believe the driver.

 

[opus111]

When I listen to different components, I expect to hear a difference and I guess we can call that “expectation bias.” However, I have learned not to automatically assume the change will be for the better.

That's a step in the direction of mitigating expectation bias, I agree.

I would like to think I can be neutral about what I expect from a new piece of gear being inserted into my system. I don’t assume/expect that the new gear will be better.

But expectations are often unconscious ones. So we aren't always aware that we have them.

The latest case in point would be the Mytek Stereo 192 DAC I just bought. I ‘hoped’ it would better than my E-MU 0404 DAC, but I think that is different than expecting it to be better because it cost more. In this case, the differences between the two DACs was so profound that it was a no brainer.

I'd say (this is conjecture mind) that hoping its better is still having expectation. You spent more money, you're probably invested in the result. But I agree with the result - I'm fairly confident it would sound better to me too.

 

[opus111]

No, it is a belief that you are not subject to it.

Well as you don't accept what I'm saying when you can have no evidence to the contrary I can see no point in continuing here. A dialog is not happening - but then I didn't expect it to

 

[terryj]

False premise - rather like the question 'When did you stop beating your wife?'.

Good one. Conveniently enables you to ignore the rest of the post and any implications within it. You know, kinda show 'one thing is wrong then all things are wrong' which, surely, a philosopher like you would admit is illogical?

The flip side, you would respond to the rest of the post if it does turn out it has changed to a concentration on expectation bias?

Chronologically




Speak for yourself, I do OK in avoiding bias personally without resorting to the onerous precautions

I'm not by any means claiming infallibility of senses, or immunity from bias. Just that my bias is manageable without the 'onerous precautions'.



(first little crack)


To diminish expectation bias its necessary to reduce one's expectation



(back to original claim)

Well I'm content with my higher than average immunity to bias not being checked,

I just said I'm above average in immunity to bias in evaluating audio quality.


So I asked you on your original claim, bias.

Quote Originally Posted by terryj View Post
You observed your lack of 'being affected by bias' (hmm, gotta be better wording than that) by testing if it was true? Must have missed it, point me to the post please.


I didn't say I'd posted about my lack of expectation bias, just that I'd observed the lack of expectation in myself.


I ask you about bias, you answered referring to expectation bias.

Above you talked about 'immunity' from it (it's presence)

Now it has dissappeared, you are not 'immune' from it, it does not exist. (lack of expectation)




But in the absence of expectation bias, there's no need to do a blind test. Which was my original claim - that I do fine without blind testing.

I predict a quibble over wording to come.


So, now would you care to respond to the rest of the post you tried to sweep away?

 

[FrantzM]

Opus111

An hypothesis is exactly that.. An expectation of a result you cannot not expect an outcome, else how would you judge of the result? The hypothesis implies an expectation of an outcome... However you play with the concept or words .. Expectation is part of an observation.. You expect something to happen or not ... You expect something from the experimentation .. else, to repeat myself why run it then? Why test the hypothesis? The only way out of this conundrum: If you expect nothing then you do nothing.. Once you commit toward an hypothesis test there is an implied expectation ... if this [Hypothesis] then [a result] else you could have tossed coins ....

 

[opus111]

Good one. Conveniently enables you to ignore the rest of the post and any implications within it.

Yep - when the foundation is dodgy the implications will be too.

I predict a quibble over wording to come.

I conjecture disappointment.

So, now would you care to respond to the rest of the post you tried to sweep away?

Where's the evidence you graduated from remedial?

 

[opus111]

An hypothesis is exactly that.. An expectation of a result you cannot not expect an outcome, else how would you judge of the result?

Its jolly common to perform an experiment and hope for a particular outcome - which doesn't then materialize. Have done it myself. Expectation is entirely optional in performing experiments though. So I disagree with the assertion that a person 'cannot expect an outcome'. Its the expectation which causes the bias.

The hypothesis implies an expectation of an outcome... However you play with the concept or words .. Expectation is part of an observation.. You expect something to happen or not ... You expect something from the experimentation ..

You're free to play with words however you wish to. In my idiolect, conjecture and expectation are not the same. I've never heard of the phrase 'conjecture bias'.

else, to repeat myself why run it then? Why test the hypothesis?

Because we're curious about the result - we'd like to understand?

The only way out of this conundrum: If you expect nothing then you do nothing..

You may well have a different meaning of this word 'expect'. That's my conjecture.

 

[amirm]

Where's the evidence you graduated from remedial?

There won't be another warning for not using such language. Please stay focused on the topic, not the person.

 

[Robh3606]

INVOLUNTARY BIAS (added 5/23): Subjective audiophiles often claim they’re not affected by the sort of sighted listening bias documented by Toole & Olive. They argue bias is only an issue for untrained listeners. But what if it’s genuinely involuntary? There’s a well understood phenomena called the McGurk Effect. It shows how certain knowledge, such as what we see, influences what we hear. And, even more significant, the bias is involuntary. Around the 2 minute mark in the video linked below they talk about how, even when your conscious brain knows what the truth is, your subconscious brain still alters your hearing in ways you cannot control. The researcher says he’s been studying this effect for 25 years and it still affects him just as much as an untrained listener. The McGurk effect goes away if you close your eyes. But in evaluating gear just closing your eyes isn’t enough if your brain still knows what you’re listening to. You need a blind test to eliminate the bias. Try it yourself with this fascinating video: (photo: BBC)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G-lN8vWm3m0

Rob

 

[opus111]

I posted up that video a while back on another thread - but Tim said there was no need to watch it

 

[terryj]

Yep - when the foundation is dodgy the implications will be too.

Sure, if the foundation is dodgy, often the rest built upon it can be dodgy. That too BTW is not an absolute...it is entirely possible the correct answer can come from incorrect foundations. Even if only by luck, it can happen.

But the dodge D) is still noted.

Leave aside the dodgy premise (ignore the chronological changes in stance) and move on to the stuff that stood separate from the (dodgy) foundation.

Where's the evidence you graduated from remedial?

Added inapplicable 'datum'. Care to explain how that fits in with whether or not you answer?

Still, I do have good news for you!

AFAICS from the thread (here is the good news), you have managed to sway one person to your point of view That person accepts (and condones I would imagine) not only your stance, but your evasions.

I always try to see the positives in a situation.

 

[opus111]

Care to explain how that fits in with whether or not you answer?

More than happy to explain that.

You confessed a few posts back to being 'slow'. I agreed with your self-description, and said if it happened again you'd be in remedial. Well it happened again, and I said so, so you're at the back of the class until you show you've caught up. I explained that you'd need to find your own remedial teacher as I wasn't going to do that job.

 

[treitz3]

This is a great example of how not to act on this forum. Thread closed. Disciplinary action to follow.

Tom