Viewpoint: The costs and benefits of deception in economic experiments
Jayson Lusk ()
Food Policy, 2019, vol. 83, issue C, 2-4
The historical justifications typically given for the prohibition against deception in economic experiments are less relevant for today’s experiments that are often conducted in non-lab settings with non-student subjects. I describe a variety of research questions that might be most adequately answered with some form of deception, and call for a more nuanced view of the issue that requires a consideration of the importance of the research question relative to the potential costs of deception. For example, in the case of new food products that have not yet been developed, does the sin of hypothetical bias outweigh the sin of deceiving subjects in a non-hypothetical experiment? It is important for journals or professions, which ban the use of deception, to actually define what practices fall under the ban.
Keywords: Experimental economics; Deception; Research ethics (search for similar items in EconPapers)
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: Track citations by RSS feed
Downloads: (external link)
Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.
Export reference: BibTeX
RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan)
Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eee:jfpoli:v:83:y:2019:i:c:p:2-4
Access Statistics for this article
Food Policy is currently edited by J. Kydd
More articles in Food Policy from Elsevier
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Dana Niculescu ().