Last Friday’s Group 1ARV analysis and judging webinar is now at the following link:
The AJing group Passed even though one of the two confidence rankings was quite high, and avoided a Miss! Passing, as discussed in the webinar, is one of the most difficult challenges for an Analyst/Judge. By “coincidence,” an independent 1ARV Group chose the same game and did receive a Hit 🙂
That looks like a very good observation about wildcards. No one’s been ignoring them but maybe Marty is up for a Webinar soon where we can discuss them and compare observations about them. Might want to review our own wildcards beforehand for further ideas from the different 1ARV groups.
I was one of the judges who gave Chris’ session a high score (6) for the unactualized photo site (attached to the option that didn’t win). His session did score higher by the other judges although they weren’t quite so generous with their scores. So this impacted the eventual decision to call it a pass although it certainly wasn’t the only factor leading to closeness in scores. In retrospect, I had a feeling his wildcard photosite might be the culprit (meaning it could have been too similar too the unactualized site and sure enough), so I asked to see his wildcard. As it turns out, it was remarkably close, a large part being identical, with the exception it was missing a couple gestalts But what was in it accounted for a large part of his descriptions that resulted in the judges giving him a high score (he did have some displacement in there too I think). Apparently this same thing happened with another of his sessions not too long ago which Marty has been using an an example. Bottom line, Wild card closeness to targets being judged can skew results and something to take into consideration, not that it’s going to be the case every time but could impact overall success rate. I think the only way to combat this down the line would be if a pool of wildcards each week were selected by an independent person who checked them out to make sure they didn’t match the two photosites attached to the possible outcomes. This would only need to be done if this weren’t being done for fun, but to do every possible thing to minimize chance factors like this, which would mean a lot more time and effort on who ever is running the project. Stay tuned…within our ARV group (“Sublime”, headed by the same Chris mentioned above) we are noticing some very interesting things developing not previously discussed between the relationship between judges and viewers and how the subconscious works)