It's so interesting to me. . . I'm a psychologist (as in capital P with a doctorate); I do know something about research into perception, and about appropriate research methodology in this field, fraught with subjective experience as it is.
The reason why double-blind study protocols are used in studying perception, and in the related field or pharmacological research, is that there is ALWAYS some sort of placebo effect. In short, people will experience what seems to be actual (as in REAL) effects when they believe that some sort of treatement is being provided. The mind, all by itself, provides an experience that is completely real to the subject, but quite independent of any actual treatment administered. This is why we use double-blind studies -- to ensure that any effect seen is a function of the actual and real treatment protocol, and not a figment of the imagination of the subject. It's not that the experience of the subject is invalid, it's that it's possible for it to have nothing to do with actual reality. To affirm the importance of identifying actual real effects is not to denigrate the experience of the placebo effect in the subject's experience, it is to find out the "truth" which can then be generalized to other situations. We can't generalize from a placebo effect. In this audio context, it is blindingly apparent that placebo effects are rife. People are experiencing effects from "treatments" (different audio equipment/configurations) that cannot be replicated in anything resembling an objective fashion. Their experience is real; this doesn't mean that actual reality conforms to their experience. It is so completely illustrative of the power of self-persuasion that the audio "experts" assert that double-blind studies cannot be used to study this aspect of perception. This simply cannot be true. What it implies is that their subjective experience is so powerful that objective evidence of the contrary has to be dismissed out of hand -- elsewise is a complete and utter eating of crow. So what could be the reason why there is this assertion of the completely impossible? Well, as they say, follow the money. Who has the motivation to deny reality? Where does their income come from? What do they stand to gain from their completely irrational position? Simple, really. R. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ RonM's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=17029 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=97489 _______________________________________________ audiophiles mailing list [email protected] http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
