Experimenter Philosophy: the Problem of Experimenter Bias in Experimental Philosophy
Review of Philosophy and Psychology 3 (3):457-467 (2012)
| Abstract | It has long been known that scientists have a tendency to conduct experiments in a way that brings about the expected outcome. Here, we provide the first direct demonstration of this type of experimenter bias in experimental philosophy. Opposed to previously discovered types of experimenter bias mediated by face-to-face interactions between experimenters and participants, here we show that experimenters also have a tendency to create stimuli in a way that brings about expected outcomes. We randomly assigned undergraduate experimenters to receive two different hypotheses about folk intuitions of consciousness, and then asked them to design experiments based on their hypothesis. Specifically, experimenters generated sentences ascribing intentional and phenomenal mental states to groups, which were later rated by online participants for naturalness. We found a significant interaction between experimenter hypothesis and participant ratings indicating a general tendency for experimenters to obtain the result that they expected. These results indicate that experimenter bias is a real problem in experimental philosophy since the methods and design employed here mirror the predominant survey methods of the field as a whole. The bearing of the current results on Knobe and Prinz’s (Phenomenology and Cognitive Science 7(1):67–83, 2008) group mind hypothesis is discussed, and new methods for avoiding experimenter bias are proposed. | |||||||||
| Keywords | No keywords specified (fix it) | |||||||||
| Categories | ||||||||||
| Options |
|
|||||||||
Download options| PhilPapers Archive |
Upload a copy of this paper Check publisher's policy on self-archival Papers currently archived: 5,709 |
| External links |
 |
| Through your library | Configure |
Similar books and articlesNat Hansen (forthcoming). A Slugfest of Intuitions: Contextualism and Experimental Design. Synthese.
James R. Griesemer (1988). Causal Explanation in Laboratory Ecology: The Case of Competitive Indeterminacy. PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1988:337 - 344.
Morris L. Shames (1979). On the Metamethodological Dimension of the "Expectancy Paradox". Philosophy of Science 46 (3):382-388.
Axel Gelfert (2011). Scientific Models, Simulation, and the Experimenter's Regress. In Paul Humphreys & Cyrille Imbert (eds.), Models, Simulations, and Representations. Routledge.
M. H. (2002). The Experimenter's Regress as Philosophical Sociology. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 33 (1):149-156.
Nancy S. Hall (2007). R. A. Fisher and His Advocacy of Randomization. Journal of the History of Biology 40 (2):295 - 325.
Isaac Levi (1982). Direct Inference and Randomization. PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1982:447 - 463.
David A. Leavens (1998). Having a Concept “See” Does Not Imply Attribution of Knowledge: Some General Considerations in Measuring “Theories of Mind”. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (1):123-124.
Mikkel Borch-Jacobsen (2005). Simulating the Unconscious. Psychoanalysis and History 7 (1):5-20.
Analytics
Monthly downloads |
Added to index2012-08-26Total downloads7 ( #133,637 of 549,694 )Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #63,425 of 549,694 )How can I increase my downloads? |
My notes
Discussion
