Sensory deprivation and suggestion: A theoretical approach

Abstract

Hamlet: Do you see yonder cloud that's almost in shape of a camel? Polonius: By the mass, and 'tis like a camel indeed. Hamlet: Methinks it is like a weasel. Polonius: It is backed like a weasel. Hamlet: Or like a whale? Polonius: Very like a whale. Most investigators have wondered what to do about the obliging subject who “helps science” by telling the experimenter what he thinks the experimenter would like to hear; the anxious subject who gives what he thinks is an appropriate response rather than an actual one; and the creative subject who cannot bear to report the same dull, mundane reaction as everybody else. The authors here suggest that these factors may influence the results of sensory deprivation experiments to a much greater extent than has heretofore been recognized, and recommend a new look at some old interpretations.

Frightened by an Old Scarecrow: The Remarkable Resilience of Demand Characteristics

“…In a note published in the American Psychologist, Taft (1957) spoke of the experimental set as a variable, suggesting a manuscript section be devoted to reporting on subject recruitment, subjects' previous research experiences, and the experimenter's characteristics. Other authors in the late 1950s and early 1960s (e.g., Criswell, 1958;Farber, 1963;Jackson & Pollard, 1962) also wrote on subject bias. Finally, deception was common practice in social psychology in the decade before Orne's article (e.g., Asch, 1955).…”