How the Cognitive Biases of Researchers Affect Research Results

[jabbr]

21 minutes ago, Jud said:

 

I have seen a paper showing measured electrical conductivity differences, after cryo vs. before. I briefly mentioned it here - this was years ago, and I've long since forgotten the citation.

@alfe provided a reference.

 

Someone could measure the noise from an amp fed by different cables to see what actual effect is present.

[Jud]

2 minutes ago, jabbr said:

@alfe provided a reference.

 

Someone could measure the noise from an amp fed by different cables to see what actual effect is present.

 

I keep thinking it would be a nice idea to do this with the complex topologies we tend to have in our home systems, with lots of boxen and lots of wires, to try to capture interactions in such complex networks. Or to extend circuit simulation software to an entire audio system, but then what would be the important electrical values to enter for each component/connection?

[jabbr]

35 minutes ago, Jud said:

I keep thinking it would be a nice idea to do this with the complex topologies we tend to have in our home systems, with lots of boxen and lots of wires, to try to capture interactions in such complex networks.
 

Doable

35 minutes ago, Jud said:

 

Or to extend circuit simulation software to an entire audio system, but then what would be the important electrical values to enter for each component/connection?

Not practically doable. 
 

a) you don’t know the detailed circuits for your components

b) commonly available SPICE doesn’t typically take into account resistor noise/nonlinearities 

[Audiophile Neuroscience]

5 hours ago, Jud said:

I would much rather discuss dielectrics than dialectics. 🙂

 

Is that a cognitive bias🤔...only looking at selective information (kidding 😁)

[jabbr]

46 minutes ago, Audiophile Neuroscience said:

 

Is that a cognitive bias🤔...only looking at selective information (kidding 😁)

You can’t have Class A without bias!

[Audiophile Neuroscience]

3 minutes ago, jabbr said:

You can’t have Class A without bias!

yeah but my Gryphon Amp has selectable Bias, I can bias my bias!

[jabbr]

4 minutes ago, Audiophile Neuroscience said:

yeah but my Gryphon Amp has selectable Bias, I can bias my bias!

Your biases could change from song to song 😂

[alfe]

13 hours ago, Jud said:

We are getting quite philosophical here, which is OK, but as for me when it comes to audio I would much rather discuss dielectrics than dialectics. 🙂

And both can be just air in reality😄

[Solstice380]

17 minutes ago, alfe said:

And both can be just air in reality😄

 

One hot, the other usually not!

[Archimago]

On 2/26/2020 at 9:45 AM, Jud said:

 

What we'd ideally like to do in getting at the objective truth about audio is to be able to find relevant scientific research. This presentation gives us some of the reasons our job isn't done then. We have to be cautious, even skeptical, in evaluating what we find, perhaps most especially if it agrees with the ideas we already have.

 

It gets at some of the reasons behind what has been called the "reproducibility crisis" (subsequent researchers being unable to reproduce results), some that should be evident, some a little more esoteric. And it reminds us about confirmation bias, which affects not only researchers, but we who "consume" research.

 

Interesting video, @Jud.

 

Thanks, and a nice reminder of the issues we're seeing in much of science these days. I liked the 1st question brought up actually and I think that "cynical" question that she wanted to move on from holds much truth in how academia is run these days. "P-hacking" is the natural consequence of the way science is done these days with attention naturally paid to what is considered "significant", the competition inherent in science, and basically the natural inclination of people to gain attention and obtain the grants they need to fund the enterprise for the next year.

 

This is the psychology I see all the time at universities. To change this I think requires a significant rethinking of how science is rewarded and incentives provided especially these days when tenured tracks are becoming less available. What she said about limiting the number of papers any academic can produce per year is a good start!

 

As for audio... Hmmm... As far as I can tell, the companies that sell questionable products are actually not engaging in science to begin with. Since when did a cable company produce any data that their "cryo'ed" cable made a significance to noise or any other relevant characteristic of sound reproduction? Where's the Nordost papers or AudioQuest data with p-values? All it is is a bunch of words on a (virtual) page insinuating that such products they sell make a difference...

 

IMO, consumers should simply stop buying into stuff like this until some research is done and results presented if the consumer cares that there's scientific value in such things (eg. cryo)... Then we can talk about about whether it's "reproducible"!