Make a Donation

Consider making a donation to support SHAKSPER.

Subscribe to Our Feeds

Current Postings RSS

Announcements RSS

Home :: Archive :: 2008 :: July ::
Golden Ear Final Report
The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 19.0422  Sunday, 20 July 2008

[1] From:   Ward Elliott <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
     Date:   Friday, 18 Jul 2008 22:50:30 -0700
     Subt:   RE: SHK 19.0415 Golden Ear Final Report

[2] From:   Janet Costa <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
     Date:   Saturday, 19 Jul 2008 17:17:16 -0700 (PDT)
     Subt:   Re: SHK 19.0415 Golden Ear Final Report


[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From:       Ward Elliott <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:       Friday, 18 Jul 2008 22:50:30 -0700
Subject: 19.0415 Golden Ear Final Report
Comment:    RE: SHK 19.0415 Golden Ear Final Report

 >>Since then, we have given a Round Two test to the highest scorers on
 >>Round 1, confirming many of them as consistent high scorers and
 >>permitting a second screening for those who did well on both rounds.
 >>This double screening raised the Final Elite Panel's collective accuracy
 >>to a remarkable nine out of ten -- almost as accurate as computers are
 >>on longer passages, and far more accurate than any computer test we
 >>know of on the very short, sonnet-length passages we tested.
 >
 >That IS truly amazing. And of course, there was a monitor present while each 
 >of these talented individuals was responding to the passages to ensure that 
 >no one was using a search engine to identify them, wasn't there?
 >
 >Jim Carroll

I've sent Hardy the long version of our final report addressing this point. The 
short of it is that bringing everyone into a room under supervision is no more 
practical for a worldwide SHAKSPER panel than Mr. Carroll's recommendations last 
year that we should have used longer, more distinctively Shakespearean passages. 
We found no evidence at all of intentional cheating on the part of our SHAKSPER 
takers, and much evidence against it. For example, the results of the first and 
second wave of SHAKSPER takers, where we supplied the answers after the test and 
cheating by immediately retaking the test would not have been hard, were 
virtually identical to those of our hardcopy Claremont pilot studies, and also 
to those of Round 2, where they could not retake the test and cheating would 
have been much more difficult than Round 1. Does Mr. Carroll think SHAKSPER 
members are more crooked than they appear? If so, we await his evidence. Last 
year his problem seemed to be that our test underestimated the respondents' 
intuitive powers; now he seems to be worried that we may have overestimated them 
-- surprisingly, because he of all people should embrace our Final Elite Panel's 
impression that the Funeral Elegy passage sounded like Shakespeare.

As always, he, or anyone else, is welcome to make up and administer another test 
more to his liking. We would be interested in how his results would compare with 
ours.

Yours,
Ward Elliott

[2]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From:       Janet Costa <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:       Saturday, 19 Jul 2008 17:17:16 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: 19.0415 Golden Ear Final Report
Comment:    Re: SHK 19.0415 Golden Ear Final Report

Jim Carroll wrote:

  >Since then, we have given a Round Two test to the highest scorers on
  >Round 1, confirming many of them as consistent high scorers and
  >permitting a second screening for those who did well on both rounds.
  >This double screening raised the Final Elite Panel's collective
  >accuracy to a remarkable nine out of ten -- almost as accurate as
  >computers are on longer passages, and far more accurate than any
  >computer test we know of on the very short, sonnet-length passages
  >we tested.
  >
  >That IS truly amazing. And of course, there was a monitor present
  >while each of these talented individuals was responding to the passages
  >to ensure that no one was using a search engine to identify them,
  >wasn't there?

Can someone give me the phonetic spelling for a "Bronx cheer???"

Janet

_______________________________________________________________
S H A K S P E R: The Global Shakespeare Discussion List
Hardy M. Cook, 
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 
The S H A K S P E R Web Site <http://www.shaksper.net>

DISCLAIMER: Although SHAKSPER is a moderated discussion list, the opinions 
expressed on it are the sole property of the poster, and the editor assumes no 
responsibility for them.
 

©2011 Hardy Cook. All rights reserved.