nonoise
The only scientific evidence I can steer you to is empirically derived:
People who go to psychics also have "empirically derived" conclusions.They experienced the fact the psychic simply knew things about them that the purported psychic "could not have known or guessed."
But of course, these people have typically made incorrect evaluations of their empirical experience. They just don’t know enough about the facts of cold reading to understand how they could have been fooled. So long as they never take on the facts of how people are fooled by cold reading, they will never relinquish their belief, and go to their grave sure their inference to real psychic powers was correct.
So...empirical experience is a dime a dozen. The question is: how well we reason from our empirical experience to explain it, and figure out if our inferences are sound.
And, no, it’s not the placebo effect, or hysteria, or delusions, or expectation bias.
How did you determine this?
Because....human perceptual biases are actually a thing....right? I presume you aren’t going to claim they don’t exist. Therefore, how do you determine that your experience was NOT caused by some expectation or other bias effect?
If your answer is along the lines "because I had the strong experience of hearing a difference" that is obviously begging the question, and would simply display ignorance about the nature of bias.
