Tag Info

Hot answers tagged

7

Procedures like this are often called "funnel debriefing" procedures, and they basically consist of an extended version of what you already had in mind. You begin with some very general questions about the nature of the experiment (e.g., "Do you have any initial thoughts or reactions about this experiment?"), then move on to some questions that are slightly ...


5

Quantitative papers There are a number of papers that didn't use a Bayesian approach but provide a relevant basis for developing quantitative Bayesian models: Zickar et al (2004) performed a mixed-model using item response theory to examine different classes of respondents to personality tests. While it doesn't appear to be a Bayesian analysis, it is an ...


4

You wrote: For the purposes of this question I would assume that it's fairly common knowledge in psychology that people touch nose or cover the mouth when saying something part of them does not believe to be true. Avoid make assumptions like this. This is not common knowledge, and in fact it is not even true. Vrij et al. (2010) discuss the literature ...


3

In a previous post on the global personality factor, you provided examples to describe how self-report items indicating higher trait levels are phrased in more socially desirable terms, hence the positive bias. I think it's important to distinguish between two (or three) kinds of biases here: one is related to the wording/content of the items (the positive ...


3

I've never looked at the GNAT before but, even though it's just about as transparent as IAT, the critical thing making it difficult to fake bias is the deadlining. In order to fake one would would have to respond in no-go trials where one would not and that also misrepresented their association. That calculation would be difficult to do in the time window ...


3

You asked for the best way, and though it may be impossible to decide upon the best way, there are certainly some good ways. As you know, experimental design is, in part, an art. If your experiment is novel, you must devise a novel way of testing whether the deception worked. If your experiment is not so novel, you may be able to leverage the technique used ...


2

Not an answer, because I couldn't find any studies, but too long for a comment: Placebos aren't arbitrary. You are not given chocolate chips as a placebo treatment for a cold. The placebeo has the form of a "real" treatment for the illness or disorder, e.g. a pill without an agent. This means that in your experiment your subjects must treat themselves ...


1

Here is a work about IPIP 50 in New Zeeland but there are also some references to USA findings: http://www.psychology.org.nz/cms_show_download.php?id=617


1

It has been shown that even if you tell a patient this pill is placebo and it's not going to help you, there's still some positive effect. It's all about perception. There was a really good TED talk with the topic "Is there scientific proof we can heal ourselves?" at TEDxAmericanRiviera presented by Lissa Rankin, MD.


1

Richard Griffith and Patrick Converse (2012) provide a good review of personality faking research that has employed a within-subjects design to examine changes in responses to personality tests between an applicant and a development context. The following represent my review of the papers identified by Griffith and Converse (2012). I take it as fairly ...



Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible