Experimenter demand effects in economic experiments

By Daniel John Zizzo. 2010

1,138 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Demography, General Decision Sciences, Safety Research

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/9487e478ffb23a078de0fd42f994e58b96596741

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Demography

In General Decision Sciences

In Safety Research

Citations in the corpus

Contagion of pro- and anti-social behavior among peers and the role of social proximity (2019, methodology): “Comments made by Ed Glaeser, Dan Houser, Larry Katz, David Laibson, Ulrich Schmidt, and Wendelin Schnedler on an early version of this experiment helped to implement the design choices accounting for EDE as described in this chapter (for a discussion, see Zizzo (2010)).”
The limits of self-governance when cooperators get punished: Experimental evidence from urban and rural Russia (2011, background): “The ''experimenter demand effect'' (see Zizzo, 2010 for a recent discussion) is a potentially important issue which we tried to minimize by several measures.”
Labor market concerns and support for immigration (2020, background): “…0.15 of a standard deviation, which corresponds to one quarter of 3Experimenter demand effects refer to changes in behavior by experimental participants resulting from cues about what constitutes appropriate behavior and about what the experimenter desires (de Quidt et al., 2017; Zizzo, 2010).”
"Yours is better!": participant response bias in HCI (2012, methodology): “These techniques include using the post-experimental inquiry [26], nondeceptive obfuscation [31] and a so-called red herring technique [17].”
oTree - An Open-Source Platform for Laboratory, Online, and Field Experiments (2016, background): “Rather than having 5 On experimenter demand and non-deceptive obfuscation see Zizzo (2010) and Bardsley et al. (2010), fn. 39. a student or reader play all the players in an n-player game, n − 1 bots might be used, and the nth player would be the human.”
“See You in Court”: How CEO narcissism increases firms' vulnerability to lawsuits (2017, background): “…demand and cueing effects by counterbalancing the collection of the personality data and experimental treatments, the participant data in the experimental studies was collected in a single session, which means that we could not completely obfuscate the purpose of the experiment (Zizzo, 2010).”
Leader corruption depends on power and testosterone (2015, background): “…structure we set up, as well as the decisions and payouts available to them; in this way, we could “ensure a direct and salient connection between decisions taken and desired monetary outcome, and therefore […] the interpretability and the internal validity of the experiment” (Zizzo, 2010, p. 77).”
Discrimination in the laboratory: A meta-analysis of economics experiments (2016, background): “…situation as a game in which they belong to one of the teams, wherein the social norm actively encourages favouritism of one’s own group – the sheer strangeness of the setting may even lead subjects to perceive a demand for discrimination on the part of the experimenter (see e.g. Zizzo, 2010).”