Abstract
AbstractReactivity, or the phenomenon by which subjects tend to modify their behavior in virtue of their being studied upon, is often cited as one of the most important difficulties involved in social scientific experiments, and yet, there is to date a persistent conceptual muddle when dealing with the many dimensions of reactivity. This paper offers a conceptual framework for reactivity that draws on an interventionist approach to causality. The framework allows us to offer an unambiguous definition of reactivity and distinguishes it from placebo effects. Further, it allows us to distinguish between benign and malignant forms of the phenomenon, depending on whether reactivity constitutes a danger to the validity of the causal inferences drawn from experimental data.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
History and Philosophy of Science,Philosophy
Reference26 articles.
1. Adair, J. G. (1984). The Hawthorne effect: a reconsideration of the methodological artifact. Journal of Applied Psychology, 69, 334–345.
2. Bardsley, N. (2008). Dictator game giving: altruism or artefact? Experimental Economics, 11(2), 122–133.
3. Camerer, C. F. (2003). Behavioral game theory: Experiments in strategic interaction. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
4. Campbell, J. (2007). An interventionist approach to causation in psychology. Causal learning: Psychology, philosophy, and computation, 58-66.
5. Dana, J., Weber, R. A., & Kuang, J. X. (2007). Exploiting moral wiggle room: experiments demonstrating an illusory preference for fairness. Economic Theory, 33(1), 67–80.
Cited by
14 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献，注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献，订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献