This reads almost verbatim as my conception of bias. "Once you've abandoned prin...

swid · 2024-07-28T15:09:48 1722179388

If I am testing something I believe works and is ready, prior to testing, I will tell you it is almost ready.

Then if we test it and it fails acceptance testing, I might learn there is a problem that takes some time to fix.

I did not arrive at a biased decision; I had priors that I used to make an estimation, which turned out to misleading.

The judge is exactly this case. They guess the time it will take to rule; it doesn’t have to mean their eventual ruling is biased.

benj111 · 2024-07-28T19:51:47 1722196307

But in this case the testing is given different amounts of time.

The thing you think works gets less testing time than the thing you aren't so sure works.

Thus the thing you think works is more likely to pass, just because you are subjecting it to less tests.

Your bias (whether you think the thing works) is having an effect on the outcome.

Good testing, as with good judging should involve 0 preconceptions.

Yes it could be that the judge has a good eye for how long a topic will take, but leaving less time for the facts to come out, necessarily means the facts are less likely to come out.

DataDive · 2024-07-28T13:56:33 1722174993

Sorry to say, but I think you have put the wagon ahead of the horse.

Being able to predict an outcome has nothing to do with the process of deriving the outcome, and it has nothing to do with bias.

There may be many signals that correlate with an outcome. If you are out of shape and move ploddingly, you probably can't do a triple axel even though you believe you can. Is that prediction biased?

Bias would be if you could demonstrate that predicting the outcome has influenced their decision-making.

intended · 2024-07-28T15:08:29 1722179309

Yes?

To expand on the point using your analogy -

Your point is that there would be some things an expert would see, and then judge to be highly improbable.

While this point can inform our thinking, it is the lesser point that exists within a bigger issue:

First - This is a court of law, not the court of public opinion, or processes. There is an expectation of exactness, and of a fair, unbiased and attentive hearing of the facts.

Second- While I don’t know what a triple axel is, I have seen people who seem utterly out of shape dance with grace, and people who appear to be incredibly fit, turn out to be frauds.

In this scenario, I would say that the assumption that each case is similar, is not valid.

I will grant that it becomes human to behave this way though.