Subject: hold on a minute.... From: Bob Carlyon <bob.carlyon(at)MRC-CBU.CAM.AC.UK> Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2000 10:28:07 +0100Dear all, As one from the anally retentive ASA school I was a bit concerned about some of the comments regarding al bregman's suggestions. So here's my view Demos are a great way of giving an audience a subjective feel for a phenomenon. But they are no substitute for experiment, nor for peer review. So I can see a value for making some demos avalable on the web, but only as spurs for those with the time and inclination to do the experiments and write them up. It is these papers, which should be published in reviewed journals, that would then deserve to be cited. Onbe reason for my comments is that, although some demos are heard the same way by everybody, there are bound to be inter-subject differences - especially in the less anally-retentive areas that Al works in (and to which I personally am somewhat belatedly heading). I think it would be an enormously retrograde step to bypass the review process and have people referring to a "demonstration" that is only perceived by a subset of listeners, or that has inadequate controls for co-varying aspects of the stimulus. Of course, experiments with the latter weakness sometimes slips through in refereed journals, but there at least you have the CHANCE that a couple of expert reviewers will spot a fatal flaw. I was particularly concerned by the statements that because Al is so distinguished he doesn't NEED a reviewer. Yes he's distinguished, no that doesn't mean he doesn't need, like everyone else, thorough external appraisal of his work before it enters the scientific literature. I think we got past accepting the "sayings of wise men" in lieu of rigorous experimental investigation some time ago regards bob carlyon Dr. Bob Carlyon MRC Cognition and Brain Sciences Unit 15 Chaucer Rd. Cambridge CB2 2EF England Phone: (44) 1223 355294 ext 720 Fax: (44) 1223 359062 NOTE NEW EMAIL ADDRESS: bob.carlyon(at)mrc-cbu.cam.ac.uk