@geoffkait
I disagree as it seems highly unlikely that someone would pay money for something they expect to provide an enhancement and not expect it to work. The "hope" that it will enhance is correlated with the pleasure in the brain. Moreover, confirmation bias is not ordinarily found in an experiment that focuses on empirical data. It is found in pseudo science that seeks to pass itself off as veracity. Much like your skilled listener experiment-- you can’t control variables properly. There is your logical fallacy. You can’t quantify listening skills, just as glupson described above. You can give hearing tests to determine the frequencies people can hear, but you certainly cannot attach a number to what they can hear when listening to subtle music which is comprised of always changing frequencies from multiple different instruments.
Not quite sure where to file that one. Maybe under one of the following,
a. Whoa!
b. Whatever
c. Please, not another glupson sympathizer!
d. Examples of Strawman arguing
e. Look who’s calling someone a pseudo scientist
f. OMG, not another pseudo neuroscientist!
g. OMG, not another pseudo physchologist!
h. All of the above