Experimenter Philosophy: the Problem of Experimenter Bias in Experimental Philosophy

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 (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1007/s13164-012-0100-9
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Revision history Request removal from index
Download options
PhilPapers Archive

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy on self-archival     Papers currently archived: 16,667
External links
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library
References found in this work BETA
Joshua Knobe (2007). Experimental Philosophy. Philosophy Compass 2 (1):81–92.
Simon Cullen (2010). Survey-Driven Romanticism. Review of Philosophy and Psychology 1 (2):275-296.

View all 13 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Add more citations

Similar books and articles
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.
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.
Mikkel Borch-Jacobsen (2005). Simulating the Unconscious. Psychoanalysis and History 7 (1):5-20.

Monthly downloads

Added to index


Total downloads

40 ( #83,639 of 1,726,249 )

Recent downloads (6 months)

20 ( #41,183 of 1,726,249 )

How can I increase my downloads?

My notes
Sign in to use this feature

Start a new thread
There  are no threads in this forum
Nothing in this forum yet.