What should be regarded as deception in experimental economics? Evidence from a survey of researchers and subjects

Michal Krawczyk

Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), 2019, vol. 79, issue C, 110-118

Abstract: I report the results of a large survey of experimental subjects and researchers concerning the use of deception. While both groups are highly heterogeneous in their evaluation of various design techniques, they tend to order them in a rather similar way. While the attitude towards deception among subjects tends to be more favorable than among researchers, even the latter do not readily conform with the common view that deception is never accepted in experimental economics. I propose a working definition and typology of deceptive techniques and find that they correctly organize the survey data. I conclude with some policy recommendations.

Keywords: Experimental methodology; Deception (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: C90 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2019
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (15)

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S221480431830329X
Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eee:soceco:v:79:y:2019:i:c:p:110-118

DOI: 10.1016/j.socec.2019.01.008

Access Statistics for this article

Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics) is currently edited by Pablo Brañas Garza

More articles in Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics) from Elsevier
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Catherine Liu ().