Re: [Harp-L] comb test

[Gene Pool <subdomaintain@xxxxxxxxx>]

Isn't it possible that these testers became frustrated, especially considering that the brass comb was used 4 times in a row near the beginning of the test?  
 
I would have rather seen a test where comb A was compared to comb B, with many different pairings of combs.
 
 
 
 
--- On Thu, 8/26/10, Jonathan Ross <jross38@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:


From: Jonathan Ross <jross38@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [Harp-L] comb test
To: harp-l@xxxxxxxxxx
Date: Thursday, August 26, 2010, 7:02 AM


A massive thanks to Brendan and Vern as well as Winslow and Michelle for the comb test at SPAH.  This sort of thing takes a lot of work and it's clear you were trying very hard to minimize variance and conduct an informal but repeatable test that could be analyzed and discussed.

It's a shame that some of the participants chose to scuttle the project rather than take part.  The conditions were known in advance, and if they had issues once they were there they should have simply backed out and allowed you to find others in their place.  What they did was dishonrable in the extreme.  Frankly, I think you should post their names--there is a good place for public rebukes and this is one of them.

But despite that, thanks again for this effort.  While the data is inconclusive (and was always going to be) I think the main thing shown is that people will identify difference even when there is none--notably no-one got the four brass combs all in a row right, or even all that close to their own scores.




JR Ross