Message to golden-eared audiophiles posting at ASR for the first time...

[Pdxwayne]

It’s a bias because most people prefer the louder sound thinking it sounds better. Just like other biases, if left uncontrolled, this results in a false preference. If we didn’t have the preference based on level, there would be no need to control for it.

Ah, that kind of bias. Thanks!

 

[Pdxwayne]

Cognitive biases are not all "imagination." They are often a failure of reason.

In the example I described, because the brain is unable to determine that the volume levels are different, it incorrectly attributes the difference in sound to the DACs sounding different.

Yes, I get that now.

 

[raistlin65]

Since @Hon brought up the idea of terms we shouldn't use, I'd like to suggest that we should be careful of using the term "placebo effect" to explain perceptual biases.

Everyone knows of the placebo effect as it refers to placebos in medical testing. And that's the situation where something that should do nothing has an effect. And granted, it can be seen as a particular type of expectation bias.

And yet, when we're talking about expectation bias and audio equipment, the equipment is always producing sound. So there is some real thing contributing to the overall evaluation of the equipment. There's just some part of it that's wrong. As opposed to placebo effect, where there's nothing real going on.

Consequently, audiophiles get pretty riled up when placebo effect is used because it implies to them that all of what they are sensing is imagination.

Rather, seems better to explain expectation bias as tipping the scales of evaluation.

And while we generally see expectation bias as favoring a piece of equipment, it could also have the opposite effect. For example, if Pyle comes out with a new amp on Amazon that actually measures fairly well, I'm sure I would be biased to think it sounds bad because of the reputation of the brand. lol

Consequently, that's another way the placebo effect doesn't quite fit what we mean by expectation bias in audio.

Thoughts?

 

[Emlin]

[QUOTE="

And while we generally see expectation bias as favoring a piece of equipment, it could also have the opposite effect. For example, if Pyle comes out with a new amp on Amazon that actually measures fairly well, I'm sure I would be biased to think it sounds bad because of the reputation of the brand. lol

Consequently, that's another way the placebo effect doesn't quite fit what we mean by expectation bias in audio.

Thoughts?[/QUOTE]

That's the nocebo effect. Really.

 

[Blumlein 88]

Should we mention the Arecibo effect?

 

[GGroch]

As opposed to placebo effect, where there's nothing real going on. Thoughts?

In audio I usually see placebo effect used when referring to pure snake oil products with no effect, like cable risers, acoustic bricks, green markers, or perhaps fancy cables.

Expectation bias or confirmation bias can also confuse because the poster often replies that they had no expectations, or thought the tweak would not cause a change. They don't realize that these biases are generally unconscious.
In any case, posters who do not fully understand how this all works often think that placebos and biases are insulting. I am not sure how to get around that. I usually post something about having biases just means you are a human. We all have them.

J.J. Johnston suggests that rather than biases, listening for differences in our systems focuses our consciousness on identifying change. This focus almost always results in hearing more detail or noticing things we hadn't heard before; even when the audio has not changed at all. Kahneman (I'm sure some are sick of referencing him at this point) calls it moving from fast thinking to slow thinking. "Focus" is probably less confrontational than "bias".

 

[ahofer]

In any case, posters who do not fully understand how this all works often think that placebos and biases are insulting. I am not sure how to get around that. I usually post something about having biases just means you are a human. We all have them.

I've noticed that. I've been thinking about cognitive biases (for professional purposes) for 25 years, so it's quite alien to me when people are like "not me". It's like saying you won't get old.

 

[pkane]

Should we mention the Arecibo effect?

Had to look it up. My first thought was it has to do with the collapse of the Western civilization due to audiophile beliefs, but the reality is that it is even more apropos. Should be documented and made sticky!

 

[raistlin65]

In audio I usually see placebo effect used when referring to pure snake oil products with no effect, like cable risers, acoustic bricks, green markers, or perhaps fancy cables.

Expectation bias or confirmation bias can also confuse because the poster often replies that they had no expectations, or thought the tweak would not cause a change. They don't realize that these biases are generally unconscious.

In any case, posters who do not fully understand how this all works often think that placebos and biases are insulting. I am not sure how to get around that. I usually post something about having biases just means you are a human. We all have them.

I think the biggest issue we have is that people have little or no understanding of cognitive biases. For example, if someone has read Kahneman's Thinking, Fast and Slow, and they understand and accept the principles in it, then I think there would be little or no resistance to the idea of perceptual biases impacting audio.

So maybe we should always start with a statement like, "Cognitive biases affect everyone and greatly impact our decision making throughout our lives." And then teach them the basics of cognitive biases, before making the arguments that we do about perceptual biases.

 

[Inner Space]

Everyone knows of the placebo effect as it refers to placebos in medical testing. And that's the situation where something that should do nothing has an effect.

Yes, but in the medical context the effects can be real - temperature goes down, tumors shrink, people get a little better. But in audio there are no real effects. It's better thought of as a kind of weak hypnosis - magazine and internet chatter, sometimes over years, stands in for the guy in the tail coat swinging the gold watch, and people believe what's suggested to them.

 

[krabapple]

The term in question was/is "perceptual bias," not 'whatever kind of bias you can think of.' I should have cited the study: Nature -- perceptual bias. It seems to be an actual scientific study, not a secondhand report paraphrasing the ideas of a person whose only presence is that of a picture of him at the podium.

Do you know how to read a scientific paper? The authors of the one you found naturally cite previous work in the same field...that you did not find. Stop writing as if perceptual bias -- 'cognitive' bias would also apply -- is hearsay just because your sci lit review skills aren't well developed.

 

[mhardy6647]

Do you know how to read a scientific paper? The authors of the one you found naturally cite previous work in the same field...that you did not find. Stop writing as if perceptual bias -- 'cognitive' bias would also apply -- is hearsay just because your sci lit review skills aren't well developed.

Not to mention that even google has google scholar, which (at least in my field) does a pretty good job of digging up relevant literature from peer-reviewed journals. I use it, more than occasionally, in lieu of the more "traditional" search tools (e.g., https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/), truth be told.

 

[ahofer]

Do you know how to read a scientific paper? The authors of the one you found naturally cite previous work in the same field...that you did not find. Stop writing as if perceptual bias -- 'cognitive' bias would also apply -- is hearsay just because your sci lit review skills aren't well developed.

..or your search was corrupted by....wait for it...confirmation bias.

 

[mhardy6647]

..or your search was corrupted by....wait for it...confirmation bias.

zut alors!

 

[GGroch]

I've noticed that. I've been thinking about cognitive biases (for professional purposes) for 25 years, so it's quite alien to me when people are like "not me". It's like saying you won't get old.

I envy you. Like quite a few others, I was driven to learning cognitive science/Kahneman et al. in the last few years through stress and desperation. I could not comprehend how 40% of the population appeared to me to be totally insane on quite a variety of topics. A lot of the craziness is amplified by social media silos and the pandemic. This all scared the bejesus, and made me feel quite stupid.

I understand it better now. Humans were not designed to be logical. Quick decisions, loyalty to tribe, and persuading others are the skills historically needed to survive. Stories are central to all this. I always knew that in sales, a credible story was far more important than a good fact. Our fast think biases are rooted in credible stories. The importance of stories is something objective audio scientists should consider when approaching members of other audio tribes. We believe stories too. It is incredibly difficult to convince someone whose storyboard is different from yours.

 

[SIY]

II understand it better now. Humans were not designed to be logical. Quick decisions, loyalty to tribe, and persuading others are the skills historically needed to survive. Stories are central to all this. I always knew that in sales, a credible story was far more important than a good fact. Our fast think biases are rooted in credible stories. The importance of stories is something objective audio scientists should consider when approaching members of other audio tribes. We believe stories too. It is incredibly difficult to convince someone whose storyboard is different from yours.

Indeed, I've done a lot of sales, and the approach and framework is totally different than doing science (not easier by any means, just different!). You have to be able to look at things the way the other person does, to understand objections, to see the motivations and speak to them. It's an exposure that academic scientists rarely get, but one of the potential perks of working in industry.

Of course, when we get back to our science, it's back to facts and evidence, and **** your feelings.

 

[mhardy6647]

I envy you. Like quite a few others, I was driven to learning cognitive science/Kahneman et al. in the last few years through stress and desperation. I could not comprehend how 40% of the population appeared to me to be totally insane on quite a variety of topics. A lot of the craziness is amplified by social media silos and the pandemic. This all scared the bejesus, and made me feel quite stupid.

I understand it better now. Humans were not designed to be logical. Quick decisions, loyalty to tribe, and persuading others are the skills historically needed to survive. Stories are central to all this. I always knew that in sales, a credible story was far more important than a good fact. Our fast think biases are rooted in credible stories. The importance of stories is something objective audio scientists should consider when approaching members of other audio tribes. We believe stories too. It is incredibly difficult to convince someone whose storyboard is different from yours.

In a case of synchronicity, I am now having Hidden Brain vibes

https://hiddenbrain.org/podcast/the-story-of-stories/

 

[righthookmike]

I mean , really, how many times do I have to say I offered to do a DBT, it was a $100 DAC. I've bought components because of Amir's reviews and measurements and Science is where I exceled in school. This is really reaching the point of stupidity and I'm pretty sure we've crossed from hard science into Freudian psychology. I give up. I'm more interested in deciding if I"m going to diy a pair of exotic horns or play around with open baffle, and how do you equate the insistance on science into insults ,name calling and outright berating someone?

 

[richard12511]

I am confused now. In your post here you somewhat agree with what bigguyca was saying. When I posted my annoyance no one had either liked his post or responded to it. I hoped his post and others like it that question assumptions to be considered. You did. Thank you!

I agree that people can often be a bit mean, sarcastic, rude with how they respond to honest personal anecdotes.

I disagree that we're obligated(or even should) take these personal anecdotes seriously. I think it's possible to dismiss these newcomers without being rude about it. They're much more likely to change their mind that way anyway. Hostility almost guarantees they'll just dig their heels in.

 

[Mnyb]

Cognitive biases are not all "imagination." They are often a failure of reason.

In the example I described, because the brain is unable to determine that the volume levels are different, it incorrectly attributes the difference in sound to the DACs sounding different.

The level should ideally be within 0.1dB or better using a voltmeter for matching is even better spl meter is easy but sadly not always accurate enough . Which makes this hard work to do properly.
But on the other if one don’t do this your comparison is not going to work

The good part is that we don’t always have to do this ourselves the science part is that we know for example that well designed DAC’s are transparent to humans. Due to others doing this legwork many times over.

It is good for ones own intellectual curiosity to try some if yourself you gain some trust in the method and the conclusions it gets you .