Subjects' Perception of Their Experimenter under Conditions of Experimenter Bias

Rosenthal, Robert; Fode, Kermit L.; Friedman, C. Jack; Vikan, Linda L.

doi:10.2466/pms.1960.11.3.325

Cited by 17 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It will be noted that 14 of the 17 scales describing Es' perceptions of their own behavior during the conduct of the experiment have been grouped together into three clusters. These clusters were obtained and found to be statistically significant in an earlier study (Rosenthal, Fode, Friedman, & Vikan, 1960).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 61%

“…The mean difference between these two scales combined was significant at the .09 level, two-tailed test ( t = 7.91, df = 1). If the accuracy of E self-ratings is likely, and an earlier study suggests that it may well be (Rosenthal, Fode, Friedman, & Vikan, 1960), it appears that these obtained differences in handling patterns may play a role in the mediation of experimenter bias to animal Ss. The solicited but unstructured comments made by all Es at the end of their questionnaire revealed that nine of the twelve Es felt good about Ss' performing well and/or badly about Ss' performing poorly.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 94%

“…These same Es rating themselves on the variables in Cluster 1 tended to describe their own behavior as more relaxed, casual, pleasant-voiced, and pleasant. These variables seem to describe a configuration which was earlier dubbed the "Perry Como Cluster" (Rosenthal, Fode, Friedman, & Vikan, 1960). On the variables in Clusters 2 and 3, Es running "bright" Ss tended to see themselves as more friendly, encouraging, less talkative, more enthusiastic, and more professional.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 95%

“…A questionnaire similar to one used in earlier studies (Rosenthal, Fode, Friedman, & Vikan, 1960) was constructed which consisted of a series of 20-point rating scales on which Es could rate their satisfaction with their participation in the experiment, their feelings about the animal Ss, and their perception of their own behavior during the conduct of the experiment. Each scale ran from -10 (extremely dissatisfied) to +10 (extremely satisfied) with intermediate labeled points.…”

Section: Subjectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

The effect of experimenter bias on the performance of the albino rat

2007

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

That an experimenter can very easily influence his subjects to give him the response he wants is a problem that every investigator recognizes and takes precautions to avoid. But how does one cope with the problem of unconscious influence? It is possible that a good many contradictory or unexpected findings are due to the fact that the experimenter unknowingly communicated his desires or expectations to his subjects. Though this problem has been generally recognized and much discussed, there has heretofore been no systematic test of the hypothesis that an experimenter can obtain from his subjects the data he expects or wants to obtain. This paper reports just such a test, and discusses what can be done to avoid experimenter influence, both conscious and unconscious.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 61%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 94%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 95%

Section: Subjectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The effect of experimenter bias on the performance of the albino rat

2007

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In a study by Hertzog and Walker (1973), incentive was provided by offering experimenters a competitive monetary reward based on the probable effectiveness of their audiotaped instructions in accomplishing the expectancy induction. Similar incentives for obtaining the desired result were provided by Rosenthal, Persinger, Vikan-Kline, and Mulry (1963) and by Rosenthal, Fode, Friedman, and Vikan (1960).…”

Section: Experimental Settingsmentioning

confidence: 86%

Personality moderators of interpersonal expectancy effects: An integrative research review.

Cooper¹,

Hazelrigg²

1988

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We used both quantitative and descriptive procedures to summarize the results of studies examining personality moderators of interpersonal expectancy effects. Five hypotheses associated with this research were identified. Three of these hypotheses specify that expecters who have a greater need to influence others, who have a greater ability to encode nonverbal messages, and who are better liked by their targets should produce target behavior more congruent with their expectancies. The remaining two hypotheses specify that targets who are more susceptible to social influence attempts and who are better decoders of nonverbal communication should be more likely to conform to their expecter's wishes. On average, results were in the predicted direction, but effect sizes were small. Expecter personality may be more influential than target personality. The relation between personality and bias may be influenced by incentives, the length of the task, and the social status of the expecter.In the early 1960s, on the basis of an unanticipated finding in his dissertation research, Robert Rosenthal began a vigorous line of inquiry meant to document and explain the existence of unconscious experimenter bias (Rosenthal, 1985). In one of the first studies of its kind, Rosenthal and Fode (1963) asked 10 graduate and undergraduate students, all of whom had research experience, to help with the development of a test of empathy.Each student experimenter showed subjects 10 photographs of people's faces and obtained the subjects' ratings concerning the degree of success or failure shown in the faces. All experimenters were given identical instructions and were told to administer the photo-rating task in identical ways. However, half of the experimenters were told that it was a well-established finding that the photos depicted successful people, and half were led to expect unsuccessful ratings. In fact, both groups used the same pictures. Results revealed that experimenters expecting more successful ratings obtained more successful ratings from their subjects.The years following this demonstration of experimenter expectancy effects witnessed an enormous amount of related research. Rosenthal and Rubin (1978) summarized over 200 expectancy studies conducted in research settings. The majority of these involved person perception tasks, but studies involving reaction time, inkblot tests, animal and human learning, laboratory interviews, and psychophysical judgments were also represented. The preponderance of evidence in each research area supported the contention that experimenter expectancies can influence research outcomes. Life Cycle of an Artifact McGuire (1969) observed that artifacts in behavioral research have a three-stage life cycle.

show abstract