Login
You're viewing the adforward.org public feed.
  • PepijnPepijn@mastodon.online
    Oct 28, 2026, 8:54 PM

    I was person two. As I greeted person one I explained I don't think core beliefs should be part of a mind game. I then explained the €100 if they would just SAY their core belief was changed. And proposed an equal split.

    We finished our coffee and were out in five minutes. Person one did their thing.

    I received our €100. As I left the investigator told me I fucked over the experiment. I ignored them.

    That final bit is my question: was my reaction to that last bit the actual experiment?

    2/2

    💬 1🔄 7⭐ 22

Replies

  • PepijnPepijn@mastodon.online
    Oct 28, 2026, 8:58 PM

    Before someone asks: person one was very much also taking part as a participant and not an actor. We discussed our confusion at the experiment over a drink (both of us had just made €50.. Serious money for a student in the early 2000s).

    edit: I answer some other questions in the comments. This was in a university of Groningen building in mid 2002. That's unfortunately all info I can find (I really just participated in these things for the free lunch and small compensation..).

    💬 2🔄 1⭐ 14
  • PepijnPepijn@mastodon.online
    Oct 28, 2026, 9:33 PM

    No, I am not traumatized by this. Unless there is financial compensation. In that case. Yes, I am one thousand euro traumatized.

    For now though. I'm just curious to what the real point of that experiment was.

    💬 0🔄 0⭐ 11
  • Maarten Sneepmrtnsnp@mastodon.social
    Oct 28, 2026, 9:03 PM

    @Pepijn Makes me wonder who was the subject of the research? Was it the investigator, to learn how not to set up the experiment? I won’t call this an obvious result, but the way you acted was certainly predictable.

    💬 0🔄 0⭐ 4
  • 💬 0🔄 0⭐ 3
  • Cat Hicksgrimalkina@mastodon.social
    Oct 29, 2026, 12:20 AM

    @deborahh @mrtnsnp @Pepijn I mean, not really? You agree to participate in a study in good faith and non compliant participants can and should be excluded. I've excluded participants who were just there to do antisocial things like be shitty to lab staff.

    💬 2🔄 0⭐ 0
  • Gabegabe@mendeddrum.org
    Oct 29, 2026, 12:28 AM

    @grimalkina @deborahh @mrtnsnp @Pepijn but this prisoner can solve his dilemma by sharing information. Which was not prohibited by the rules as described, and that's the question here: were the experiment subjects noncooperative, or was the experimenter unethically not disclosing (after the fact) the actual experiment, or was the experiment poorly designed?

    Or did the notional experimenter lie just to give the subjects some drinking money?

    💬 1🔄 0⭐ 0
  • 💬 2🔄 0⭐ 0
  • Cat Hicksgrimalkina@mastodon.social
    Oct 29, 2026, 12:50 AM

    @gabe @deborahh @mrtnsnp @Pepijn generally when someone starts saying "I don't agree with this study" as described here I'd take that as immediate self withdrawal. We care about things like that for validity checks. But very unlikely this was a deception study, those get debriefed. At any rate not sure I'd trust a years old recounting of a method from someone who was hostile toward it to begin with!

    💬 0🔄 0⭐ 0
  • PepijnPepijn@mastodon.online
    Oct 29, 2026, 5:59 AM

    @grimalkina I'm not sure if I understand your comments. Are you speaking generally or specifically here?

    As to this specifically: the 'recollection' is correct and not something drifted away from the truth over time (the steps are directly from how I wrote it down the day itself). The only person being -very- rude / aggressive was the researcher. And at no point were I or the other person hostile or disagreeing with the study: I followed the instructions as given.

    @gabe @deborahh @mrtnsnp

    💬 1🔄 0⭐ 0
  • Cat Hicksgrimalkina@mastodon.social
    Oct 29, 2026, 4:31 PM

    @Pepijn @gabe @deborahh @mrtnsnp the instructions were that you do this? "As I greeted person one I explained I don't think core beliefs should be part of a mind game. I then explained the €100 if they would just SAY their core belief was changed." Come on.

    💬 2🔄 0⭐ 0
  • Cat Hicksgrimalkina@mastodon.social
    Oct 29, 2026, 4:33 PM

    @Pepijn @gabe @deborahh @mrtnsnp if all you wanted to do was basically kvetch that someone was rude to you, go forth. But you asked for psychology researchers to give you a pov about how these procedures are expected to work and I've done so. It's not insulting to say that people's recollections of social interactions often drift over time, it's robustly empirically known. If you weren't ACTUALLY interested in a discussion about psych don't ask for one.

    💬 0🔄 0⭐ 0
  • PepijnPepijn@mastodon.online
    Oct 29, 2026, 4:51 PM

    @grimalkina The instructions offered a very large amount of money and had a very obvious solution to something otherwise nearly impossible. I'm fairly certain many other participants as "person number two" thought the same thing as I did. My words were exactly what was needed to convince a stranger to that.

    >..you asked for psychology researchers to give you a pov about how these procedures are expected to work..

    I asked if that last bit was the actual research.

    @gabe @deborahh @mrtnsnp

    💬 0🔄 0⭐ 0
  • Trisha Lynn 🇵🇭 🇺🇸 🇨🇦trishalynn@mastodon.sandwich.net
    Oct 29, 2026, 5:00 PM

    @grimalkina @Pepijn I agree that it’s not possible to give an opinion without knowing if the informed consent document you had to sign included the instructions to attempt to answer the prompt sincerely. If I were writing this research proposal, I’d have all of the discussion sessions be administered by a member of the research team & instruct the participants that they should ask for clarification if something is confusing or unclear.

    💬 0🔄 0⭐ 0