The importance of intellectual honesty in reviews.

[Candlesticks]

I've been recently thinking about what qualities make someone good at reviews.

Often qualities of a reviewer described give a significant amount of focus on prerequisite knowledge, attention to small detail and the ability to evaluate products fairly regardless of the manufacturer.

However, the more I've thought about it there is something I consider more important than any of that. Intellectual honesty.

Ultimately, your experience counts for nothing if you can never admit to be wrong. As is the case often with reviews it relies upon the skills and knowledge of the reviewer to translate data into something meaningful that a consumer can use to decide whether to purchase or not.

Everyone makes mistakes though. If a person can never ever admit to making a mistake it's the consumer who ends up paying the price.

As is so often the case ego gets wrapped up in argument. Conversations get heated. What I consider the most important quality above all in reviews is the person who can show humility to the crowd and admit to being wrong when they are. That doesn't mean deflect until it's unclear who is right or wrong but fully admit to being wrong when they know they are. Why? Because, that shows they put the consumers above their own ego and reputation.

I would rather read the reviews of someone who makes mistakes, admits they are wrong and learns from it than the person with a great deal of experience but who argues to the point of dishonesty to avoid ever admitting being wrong. The former will eventually improve and the latter will eventually become a liability to the people they are meant to inform.

 

[sergeauckland]

Hmmm,

I don't understand reviews. Whether wine, restaurant, theatre or indeed, HiFi, it's just somebody's subjective impressions, and therefore of zero value to me.

I care ONLY for objective reviews, with numbers and measurements. That's why Tripadvisor means nothing to me. Everything else is just one person's opinion, and we know what opinions are.

Like arseholes, we all have one!

And of as much value to others.

S

 

[NorthSky]

• Review: Thomas Sowell’s field guide to intellectuals

• Intellectual Dishonesty

 

[Wayne]

▪ PDF Article /
Intellectual Honesty and the Contemporary Scientist

@NorthSky: I appreciate the reference, but it appears that one must spend $36 to purchase the PDF to read the reference. It would be appreciated if you stated by the reference the costs, so the reader doesn't use time chasing the article, and then finding it has a price tag. Thanks for your consideration.

 

[NorthSky]

I just noticed now; I removed it...honest information should be free.

In compensation: http://audiophilereview.com/audiophile-news/keeping-audio-reviewers-honest.html

 

[Brad]

The problem with many subjective fields, but especially audio and wine, is that you can be convinced there was a change/improvement when in reality there was none.
Is that honest or dishonest?
It's really about understanding your limitations

 

[NorthSky]

Same with the Earth being flat; some people can be convinced by others.
It's a . . . social issue, not a science issue. ...Same with climate change, bitcoin, oil versus electricity, ecology versus radioactivity, Koolaid versus cornflakes, ...

...In prescription drugs, in pharmaceuticals, in therapeutics, in enhancement drugs, in ... almost everything.

There is a balance.

* I watched a documentary recently - Abacus: Small Enough to Jail
It's a good doc

We, as observers and readers we are easily convinced by convincing reviewers who are themselves convinced.

 

[rebbiputzmaker]

I've been recently thinking about what qualities make someone good at reviews.

Often qualities of a reviewer described give a significant amount of focus on prerequisite knowledge, attention to small detail and the ability to evaluate products fairly regardless of the manufacturer.

However, the more I've thought about it there is something I consider more important than any of that. Intellectual honesty.

Ultimately, your experience counts for nothing if you can never admit to be wrong. As is the case often with reviews it relies upon the skills and knowledge of the reviewer to translate data into something meaningful that a consumer can use to decide whether to purchase or not.

Everyone makes mistakes though. If a person can never ever admit to making a mistake it's the consumer who ends up paying the price.

As is so often the case ego gets wrapped up in argument. Conversations get heated. What I consider the most important quality above all in reviews is the person who can show humility to the crowd and admit to being wrong when they are. That doesn't mean deflect until it's unclear who is right or wrong but fully admit to being wrong when they know they are. Why? Because, that shows they put the consumers above their own ego and reputation.

I would rather read the reviews of someone who makes mistakes, admits they are wrong and learns from it than the person with a great deal of experience but who argues to the point of dishonesty to avoid ever admitting being wrong. The former will eventually improve and the latter will eventually become a liability to the people they are meant to inform.

Do you have any examples? Good reviewers or reviews, bad ones?

Here is IMO a good reviewer.

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCR4tuhqPppVp-PD0q17sPEA

 

[Brad]

It doe blow my mid however, that people insist the recent SpaceX launch is a conspiracy and insist that the earth is flat

 

[stunta]

Hmmm,

I don't understand reviews. Whether wine, restaurant, theatre or indeed, HiFi, it's just somebody's subjective impressions, and therefore of zero value to me.

I care ONLY for objective reviews, with numbers and measurements. That's why Tripadvisor means nothing to me. Everything else is just one person's opinion, and we know what opinions are.

Like arseholes, we all have one!

And of as much value to others.

S

That is a bit extreme IMO. If I visiting a foreign country and I end up in a place with a choice between two restaurants - one has 'n' number of all-positive reviews and the other has 'n' number of all-negative reviews, I'd err on the side of the former. Subjective opinions can be an acceptable guide when the numbers are statistically significant - this is how surveys/polls work.

Top chefs did not become top chefs because there were unbiased measurements of the food.

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

I've been recently thinking about what qualities make someone good at reviews.

Often qualities of a reviewer described give a significant amount of focus on prerequisite knowledge, attention to small detail and the ability to evaluate products fairly regardless of the manufacturer.

However, the more I've thought about it there is something I consider more important than any of that. Intellectual honesty.

Ultimately, your experience counts for nothing if you can never admit to be wrong. As is the case often with reviews it relies upon the skills and knowledge of the reviewer to translate data into something meaningful that a consumer can use to decide whether to purchase or not.

Everyone makes mistakes though. If a person can never ever admit to making a mistake it's the consumer who ends up paying the price.

As is so often the case ego gets wrapped up in argument. Conversations get heated. What I consider the most important quality above all in reviews is the person who can show humility to the crowd and admit to being wrong when they are. That doesn't mean deflect until it's unclear who is right or wrong but fully admit to being wrong when they know they are. Why? Because, that shows they put the consumers above their own ego and reputation.

I would rather read the reviews of someone who makes mistakes, admits they are wrong and learns from it than the person with a great deal of experience but who argues to the point of dishonesty to avoid ever admitting being wrong. The former will eventually improve and the latter will eventually become a liability to the people they are meant to inform.

Are you talking about incorrect measurements or faulty testing methodology? I’m not sure how subjective reviews can be “wrong.” Or right, for that matter.

 

[Candlesticks]

Are you talking about incorrect measurements or faulty testing methodology? I’m not sure how subjective reviews can be “wrong.” Or right, for that matter.

It can be both and it can be simple mistakes made. Measurements are still performed by a person at a bench using software and mistakes can be made.

 

[NorthSky]

It doe blow my mid however, that people insist the recent SpaceX launch is a conspiracy and insist that the earth is flat

That, blows your mind, ...it blows mine too, and the same when going to the Olympics as a representative of our country we sit down in our chair while everyone else is standing up and cheering for all athletes from all 92 world countries.

Honesty and integrity and intellectually in the heart and mind of men, women and children of our planet are pillars of utmost importance towards living in a better world, audio/video reviewers from everywhere included.

We live in a more informed society, with background checks, with heavy criticisms, with fundamental values, in denouncing abuses, we have a voice we can share with others, we can advance much further when admitting our mistakes and working on not repeating them.

If I am a professional audio reviewer working with a team of other audio experts, scientists, engineers, and I write a review from my experience, with comparisons, with my ears, my heart, my writing skills, my passion, motivation, inspiration; the best I give is the best in me and the best from my team and to the best of my readers. This is not the end of the world, it is a hobby for the love of music, and for others a deep passion and a living.

Nobody is perfect, the mistakes we all make not everyone admit.
It's not the end of the world, unless you want to conquer and rule the world.
No one wants that, we have seen and learned from history, we don't want to repeat the same mistakes again. No audio electronics is perfect forever, the sounds of music improve over time in tandem with the soul and spirit of humanity.

 

[Soniclife]

I think in order for a review to be intellectually honest it needs be inquisitive, if something seems to demonstrate a large change without clear and understood reasons it should be investigated properly.

 

[NorthSky]

Perform drug tests on professionnal audio reviewers, with background checks on their past studies and activities and diplomas, relatives, families, friends and ancestors...tree of life?

 

[RayDunzl]

Perform drug tests on professional audio reviewers

Why?

To see if they use them, or to see what happens?

Or maybe they could give reviews of different trendy chemical amusement aids?

Good idea!

 

[Candlesticks]

Why?

To see if they use them, or to see what happens?

Or maybe they could give reviews of different trendy chemical amusement aids?

Good idea!

I would read reviews written by audiophiles on drugs. They might become more intelligible.

It doe blow my mid however, that people insist the recent SpaceX launch is a conspiracy and insist that the earth is flat

You can't argue with people who invoke conspiracy because they will dismiss all evidence as being part of the conspiracy.

 

[NorthSky]

Why?

To see if they use them, or to see what happens?

Or maybe they could give reviews of different trendy chemical amusement aids?

Good idea!

Humour Ray. I was simply humorous. Between here and over there the road is a balanced one.

 

[stalepie]

The SpaceX launch was definitely fake. You can see in this video that the background (the earth part) shakes while the foreground (the car part) doesn't:

This requires compositing. It wouldn't happen in a normally shot video where the foreground and background are shot as one.

 

[RayDunzl]

If you can't rationally explain what would cause that, it's not my problem.