The Human Subject: A Study of Individual Experimental Participation

Abstract

Intensive analysis of subjects' individual perceptions of an experimental task was conducted in distinctly different contexts of testing. Independent sets of subjects were tested individually in a rapport-inducing context (defined as collaborative) and a traditional context of research engagement (defined as contractual). Collaborative subjects were either known before hand or not known beforehand by the experimenter who tested them. The task was a difficult problem-solving one that allowed subjects to manifest their changing perceptions of the test situation over time. Results indicated marked within-subject variability and intergroup variation in subjects' attitudes to the experimenter and his test procedures. Data highlighted, in particular, the error of typing subjects in terms of well-defined roles or collections of social attitudes. The pattern of interplay between subject and experimenter was multidimensional and suggested the need to redefine the application of the concept of role to the social psychology of the psychological experiment.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

ARGYRIS, C. Some unintended consequences of rigorous research . Psychological Bulletin, 1968, 70, 185-197 .

ARGYRIS, C. Dangers in applying results from experimental social psychology . American Psychologist, 1975, 30, 469-485 .

CARLSON, R.

Where is the person in personality research?

Psychological Bulletin, 1971, 75, 203-217 .

FILLENBAUM, S. Prior deception and subsequent experimental performance: The "faithful" subject . Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1966, 4, 532-537 .

FILLENBAUM, S. , & FREY, R. More on the "faithful" behavior of suspicious subjects . Journal of Personality, 1970, 38, 43-51 .

GIORGI, A. Psychology as a human science: A phenomenologically based approach. New York: Harper & Row , 1970.

HOLMES, D. S. , & APPELBAUM, A. S.

Nature of prior experimental experience as a determinant of performance in a subsequent experiment

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1970, 14, 195-202 .

JOURARD, S. M. Disclosing man to himself. Princeton, N.J.: Van Nostrand , 1968.

KELMAN, H. C. Human use of human subjects: The problem of deception in social psychological experiments . Psychological Bulletin, 1967, 67, 1-11 .

10.

LEVY, L. H. Awareness, learning, and the beneficent subject as expert witness . Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1967, 6, 365-370 .

11.

MASLING, J. Role-related behavior of the subject and psychologist and its effect on psychological data . Nebraska Symposium on Motivation, 1966, 14, 67-103 .

12.

MILGRAM, S. Some conditions of obedience and disobedience to authority . Human Relations, 1965, 18, 57-76 .

13.

MILGRAM, S. Interpreting obedience: Error and evidence. A reply to Orne and Holland. In A. G. Miller (Ed.), The socialpsychology ofpsychological research. New York: Collier MacMillan , 1972.

14.

ORNE, M. T. On the social psychology of the psychological experiment: With particular reference to demand characteristics and their implications . American Psychologist, 1962, 17, 776-783 .

15.

ORNE, M. T. Demand characteristics and the concept of quasi-controls. In R. Rosenthal & R. L. Rosnow (Eds.), Artifact in behavioral research. New York: Academic Press , 1969.

16.

ROSENBERG, M. J. The conditions and consequences of evaluation apprehension. In R. Rosenthal & R. L. Rosnow (Eds.), Artifact in behavioral research. New York: Academic Press , 1969.

17.

ROSENKRANTZ, A. L. , & VAN DE RIET, V. The influence of familiar and unfamiliar experimenters on child performance . Journal of Genetic Psychology, 1972, 121, 235-243 .

18.

SCHULTZ, D. P. The human subject in psychological research . Psychological Bulletin, 1969, 72, 214-228 .

19.

SIGALL, H. , ARONSON, E. , & VAN HOOSE, T.

The cooperative subject: Myth or reality?

Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 1970, 6, 1-10 .

20.

WAAG, W. L. , TYLER, D. M. , & HALCOMB, C. G. Experimenter effects in monitoring performance . Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 1973, 1, 387-388 .

21.

WEBB, E. J. , CAMPBELL, D. T. , SCHWARTZ, R. D. , & SECHREST, L. Unobtrusive measures. Chicago, Ill.: Rand McNally , 1972.

22.

WEBER, S. J. , & COOK, T. D. Subject effects in laboratory research: An examination of subject roles, demand characteristics, and valid inference . Psychological Bulletin, 1972, 77, 273-295 .