Deception in Experiments: Revisiting the Arguments in Its Defense

Hertwig, Ralph; Ortmann, Andreas

doi:10.1080/10508420701712990

Cited by 154 publications

(129 citation statements)

References 121 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

122

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This method avoids the need for deception, which can cause suspicion in participants and create problems for future experiments (Hertwig & Ortmann, 2008). The social information was real in five trials for each participant, and the actual answers of a group of demonstrators were provided.…”

Section: Social Informationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sex differences in confidence influence patterns of conformity

Cross

Brown

Morgan

et al. 2016

British J of Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

AcknowledgementsWe are grateful to Alex Mesoudi, Volker Franz and two anonymous reviewers for comments on the manuscript. The research was supported in part by an ERC Advanced Grant (EVOCULTURE, Ref. 232823) awarded to KNL.Sex differences in confidence and conformity 2 AbstractLack of confidence in one's own ability can increase the likelihood of relying on social information.Sex differences in confidence have been extensively investigated in cognitive tasks, but implications for conformity have not been directly tested. Here, we tested the hypothesis that, in a task that shows sex differences in confidence, an indirect effect of sex on social information use will also be evident. Participants (N=168) were administered a mental rotation (MR) task or a letter transformation (LT) task. After providing an answer, participants reported their confidence before seeing the responses of demonstrators and being allowed to change their initial answer. In the MR, but not the LT, task, women showed lower levels of confidence than men, and confidence mediated an indirect effect of sex on the likelihood of switching answers. These results provide novel, experimental evidence that confidence is a general explanatory mechanism underpinning susceptibility to social influences. Our results have implications for the interpretation of the wider literature on sex differences in conformity.Sex differences in confidence and conformity 3

show abstract

Section: Social Informationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sex differences in confidence influence patterns of conformity

Cross

Brown

Morgan

et al. 2016

British J of Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…There are several ethical and methodological reasons why researchers should use deception sparingly (see Hertwig & Ortmann, 2008a). The present study suggests yet another reason.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 82%

“…Participant awareness of the deception or of the true purpose of the study is likely to shape participants' behaviors and to skew the data collected. In addition, previous research (see Hertwig & Ortmann, 2008a) has suggested that participant suspiciousness may also impact research outcomes adversely. The irony of this is that researchers who deceive participants are relying on those deceived participants not to deceive the researchers in order to interpret their data.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing the adequacy of postexperimental inquiries in deception research and the factors that promote participant honesty

et al. 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The primary aim of this research was to assess the adequacy of postexperimental inquiries (PEI) used in deception research, as well as to examine whether mood state, reward, or administering the PEI as a face-to-face interview or computer survey impacts participants' willingness to divulge suspicion or knowledge about a study. We also sought to determine why participants are not always forthcoming on the PEI. Study 1 examined how frequently PEIs are included in research and found that most researchers employing deception do use a PEI. Studies 2 and 3 showed that participants are often unwilling to divulge suspicion or awareness of deception or to admit to having prior knowledge about a study, though offering a reward and completing the PEI on a computer modestly improved awareness and admission rates. Study 4 indicated several reasons why participants may not reveal suspicion or knowledge about a study on the PEI.

show abstract

“…De esta manera, se logra obtener reacciones que no se podrían observar sin ese recurso. Sin embargo, el engaño se usa cada vez menos y con mayores restricciones (Hertwig y Ortmann, 2008). La psicología difiere de la economía también en el instrumento principal de medición, pues usa sobre todo el cuestionario.…”

Section: Los Experimentos Desde La Psicologíaunclassified

Análisis experimental de la corrupción y de las medidas anticorrupción. ¿Dónde estamos, hacia dónde vamos?

Boehm¹,

E²,

Diaz³

2015

OPE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Este artículo presenta una discusión de la literatura interdisciplinar reciente sobre el estudio empírico y experimental de la corrupción. El análisis empírico de la corrupción se ve dificultado por su naturaleza ilícita. En las dos últimas décadas, han prevalecido estudios econométricos basados en datos de percepción de corrupción. Si bien estos han avanzado nuestro entendimiento del fenómeno, cada vez más se notan los límites de esta metodología al establecer causalidades y explorar los fundamentos de la toma de decisión corrupta o ética de los individuos. Recientemente, las literaturas económica, política, psicológica y organizacional han aplicado el método experimental para entender mejor el comportamiento corrupto y probar medidas anticorrupción. La revisión presenta y discute los principales aportes de esta literatura y así brinda un punto de partida para seguir investigando las preguntas abiertas.

show abstract

Deception in Experiments: Revisiting the Arguments in Its Defense

Cited by 154 publications

References 121 publications

Sex differences in confidence influence patterns of conformity

Sex differences in confidence influence patterns of conformity

Assessing the adequacy of postexperimental inquiries in deception research and the factors that promote participant honesty

Análisis experimental de la corrupción y de las medidas anticorrupción. ¿Dónde estamos, hacia dónde vamos?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About