1976
DOI: 10.1037/0003-066x.31.8.595
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Role-enactment and deception methodologies? Alternative paradigms?

Abstract: A theoretical analysis and a review of the uses of role-playing and deception methods support the position that role-playing methods are based on a more comprehensive and inclusive conceptualization of human behavior than are deception methods. It is shown further that role-playing assumptions are better able to account for the empirical findings in research on the behavior of subjects in laboratory experiments. It follows that role-playing studies should be the standard against which deception studies are com… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
24
0

Year Published

1981
1981
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
7
3

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 62 publications
(25 citation statements)
references
References 46 publications
(50 reference statements)
1
24
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Although we believe-that natural interaction is preferable to simulated interaction when researchers wish to make claims concerning communicative behaviors, ethical concerns and problems of access to naturally occurring social confrontations has led us to rely upon role-playing at this point in the research program. Further, role-playing has frequently been cited as a viable methodology and alternative to experimental techniques involving deception (e.g., Forward, Canter, & Kirsch, 1976;Geller, 1978). There is growing support for the belief that the role-play can account for the complexity of simultaneous behaviors found in naturalistic interaction (Raush, Barry, Hertel, & Swain, 1974;Yardley, 1982).…”
Section: Generating Sc Episodesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Although we believe-that natural interaction is preferable to simulated interaction when researchers wish to make claims concerning communicative behaviors, ethical concerns and problems of access to naturally occurring social confrontations has led us to rely upon role-playing at this point in the research program. Further, role-playing has frequently been cited as a viable methodology and alternative to experimental techniques involving deception (e.g., Forward, Canter, & Kirsch, 1976;Geller, 1978). There is growing support for the belief that the role-play can account for the complexity of simultaneous behaviors found in naturalistic interaction (Raush, Barry, Hertel, & Swain, 1974;Yardley, 1982).…”
Section: Generating Sc Episodesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These five situations formed one factor in the between-group analyses reported in this study, with approximately 1,100 subjects assigned randomly to each situation. The usefulness of such a role-playing methodology has been convincingly argued (Cooper, 1976;Forward, Canter, & Kirsch, 1976), especially in situations such as the present one, where the research emphasis is on cognitions and attitudes rather than on overt behavior (Miller, 1972).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 75%
“…In particular, scholars debated whether role‐plays could replace traditional experimental methods in psychology. Those in favor of the use of role‐play argued that while traditional methodologies were based on deceiving the participants, role‐play techniques were more humanistic and person‐centered (Forward et al ; Freedman ; Miller ; Yardley ).…”
Section: Role‐play and “As If” Behaviormentioning
confidence: 99%