We're not talking about rocket science or creative accounting practices here - simply which do you prefer!!!
EXACTLY my point. I prefer careful crossover listening without all the rocket science. However, if you intend on going the science route, either do it right or you're doing it wrong.
In that case, the tester can create a random number generator, using sophisticated scientific methods - like, uh, flipping a coin or something.....
Having an investigator come up with and manually select the unit for testing, opens the protocol to suspicion and questioning, and probably introduces testing error variables which can confound the results thereby increasing the total trials needed to reach a significant p value.
If your study can reach a significant p value in ten tests or fewer, then the difference is so significant and obvious as to make the blind testing un-necessary in the first place.
Why not carefully listen to each unit a few times and then if you cannot discern a difference or make a decision, either buy the cheaper unit or then do your blinded testing?
Previous Topic
Index
