Objecting to experiments even while approving of the policies or treatments they compare
We resolve a controversy over two competing hypotheses about why people object to randomized experiments: 1) People unsurprisingly object to experiments only when they object to a policy or treatment the experiment contains, or 2) people can paradoxically object to experiments even when they approve...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences - PNAS 2020-08, Vol.117 (32), p.18948-18950 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 18950 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 32 |
| container_start_page | 18948 |
| container_title | Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences - PNAS |
| container_volume | 117 |
| creator | Heck, Patrick R. Chabris, Christopher F. Watts, Duncan J. Meyer, Michelle N. |
| description | We resolve a controversy over two competing hypotheses about why people object to randomized experiments: 1) People unsurprisingly object to experiments only when they object to a policy or treatment the experiment contains, or 2) people can paradoxically object to experiments even when they approve of implementing either condition for everyone. Using multiple measures of preference and test criteria in five preregistered within-subjects studies with 1,955 participants, we find that people often disapprove of experiments involving randomization despite approving of the policies or treatments to be tested. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1073/pnas.2009030117 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>jstor_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_7430984</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><jstor_id>26968665</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>26968665</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c420t-6f4cd061f72bb86308af03810edb136b1f988196ff1029023d1b1efdbbf904313</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpdkcFrFDEUxoModls9exICXrxM-16SzSQXQYpWodCLgreQzLx0Z5mdjEl2tf-9s2yp6Okdvt_38T0-xt4gXCK08mqefLkUABYkILbP2ArBYqOVhedsBSDaxiihzth5KVtYuLWBl-xMihYtSrliP-7Clro6TPe8Jk6_Z8rDjqZaOB1o4r82w0jcz3NOhyOTIq8b4nMah26gwlPmNZOvJ8siPfAu7Waf6RV7Ef1Y6PXjvWDfP3_6dv2lub27-Xr98bbplIDa6Ki6HjTGVoRgtATjI0iDQH1AqQNGawxaHSOCsCBkjwEp9iFEC0qivGAfTrnzPuyo75Yi2Y9uXt7w-cElP7h_lWnYuPt0cK2SYI1aAt4_BuT0c0-lut1QOhpHP1HaFyeUMKBhrfWCvvsP3aZ9npb3FkoKY9bKHBtdnagup1IyxacyCO64mjuu5v6utjjenhzbUlN-woW22mi9ln8AfymUVg</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2432885481</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Objecting to experiments even while approving of the policies or treatments they compare</title><source>Jstor Complete Legacy</source><source>PubMed Central</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><source>Free Full-Text Journals in Chemistry</source><creator>Heck, Patrick R. ; Chabris, Christopher F. ; Watts, Duncan J. ; Meyer, Michelle N.</creator><creatorcontrib>Heck, Patrick R. ; Chabris, Christopher F. ; Watts, Duncan J. ; Meyer, Michelle N.</creatorcontrib><description>We resolve a controversy over two competing hypotheses about why people object to randomized experiments: 1) People unsurprisingly object to experiments only when they object to a policy or treatment the experiment contains, or 2) people can paradoxically object to experiments even when they approve of implementing either condition for everyone. Using multiple measures of preference and test criteria in five preregistered within-subjects studies with 1,955 participants, we find that people often disapprove of experiments involving randomization despite approving of the policies or treatments to be tested.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0027-8424</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1091-6490</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1073/pnas.2009030117</identifier><identifier>PMID: 32719133</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Washington: National Academy of Sciences</publisher><subject>BRIEF REPORTS ; Experiments ; Policies ; Randomization ; Social Sciences</subject><ispartof>Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences - PNAS, 2020-08, Vol.117 (32), p.18948-18950</ispartof><rights>Copyright National Academy of Sciences Aug 11, 2020</rights><rights>Copyright © 2020 the Author(s). Published by PNAS. 2020</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c420t-6f4cd061f72bb86308af03810edb136b1f988196ff1029023d1b1efdbbf904313</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c420t-6f4cd061f72bb86308af03810edb136b1f988196ff1029023d1b1efdbbf904313</cites><orcidid>0000-0003-0819-3890 ; 0000-0001-5005-4961 ; 0000-0001-5497-8803 ; 0000-0002-7379-7378</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/26968665$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/26968665$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,723,776,780,799,881,27903,27904,53769,53771,57995,58228</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Heck, Patrick R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chabris, Christopher F.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Watts, Duncan J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Meyer, Michelle N.</creatorcontrib><title>Objecting to experiments even while approving of the policies or treatments they compare</title><title>Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences - PNAS</title><description>We resolve a controversy over two competing hypotheses about why people object to randomized experiments: 1) People unsurprisingly object to experiments only when they object to a policy or treatment the experiment contains, or 2) people can paradoxically object to experiments even when they approve of implementing either condition for everyone. Using multiple measures of preference and test criteria in five preregistered within-subjects studies with 1,955 participants, we find that people often disapprove of experiments involving randomization despite approving of the policies or treatments to be tested.</description><subject>BRIEF REPORTS</subject><subject>Experiments</subject><subject>Policies</subject><subject>Randomization</subject><subject>Social Sciences</subject><issn>0027-8424</issn><issn>1091-6490</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2020</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNpdkcFrFDEUxoModls9exICXrxM-16SzSQXQYpWodCLgreQzLx0Z5mdjEl2tf-9s2yp6Okdvt_38T0-xt4gXCK08mqefLkUABYkILbP2ArBYqOVhedsBSDaxiihzth5KVtYuLWBl-xMihYtSrliP-7Clro6TPe8Jk6_Z8rDjqZaOB1o4r82w0jcz3NOhyOTIq8b4nMah26gwlPmNZOvJ8siPfAu7Waf6RV7Ef1Y6PXjvWDfP3_6dv2lub27-Xr98bbplIDa6Ki6HjTGVoRgtATjI0iDQH1AqQNGawxaHSOCsCBkjwEp9iFEC0qivGAfTrnzPuyo75Yi2Y9uXt7w-cElP7h_lWnYuPt0cK2SYI1aAt4_BuT0c0-lut1QOhpHP1HaFyeUMKBhrfWCvvsP3aZ9npb3FkoKY9bKHBtdnagup1IyxacyCO64mjuu5v6utjjenhzbUlN-woW22mi9ln8AfymUVg</recordid><startdate>20200811</startdate><enddate>20200811</enddate><creator>Heck, Patrick R.</creator><creator>Chabris, Christopher F.</creator><creator>Watts, Duncan J.</creator><creator>Meyer, Michelle N.</creator><general>National Academy of Sciences</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QG</scope><scope>7QL</scope><scope>7QP</scope><scope>7QR</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>7SS</scope><scope>7T5</scope><scope>7TK</scope><scope>7TM</scope><scope>7TO</scope><scope>7U9</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>M7N</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>RC3</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0819-3890</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5005-4961</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5497-8803</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7379-7378</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20200811</creationdate><title>Objecting to experiments even while approving of the policies or treatments they compare</title><author>Heck, Patrick R. ; Chabris, Christopher F. ; Watts, Duncan J. ; Meyer, Michelle N.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c420t-6f4cd061f72bb86308af03810edb136b1f988196ff1029023d1b1efdbbf904313</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2020</creationdate><topic>BRIEF REPORTS</topic><topic>Experiments</topic><topic>Policies</topic><topic>Randomization</topic><topic>Social Sciences</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Heck, Patrick R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chabris, Christopher F.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Watts, Duncan J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Meyer, Michelle N.</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Animal Behavior Abstracts</collection><collection>Bacteriology Abstracts (Microbiology B)</collection><collection>Calcium & Calcified Tissue Abstracts</collection><collection>Chemoreception Abstracts</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Entomology Abstracts (Full archive)</collection><collection>Immunology Abstracts</collection><collection>Neurosciences Abstracts</collection><collection>Nucleic Acids Abstracts</collection><collection>Oncogenes and Growth Factors Abstracts</collection><collection>Virology and AIDS Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>Algology Mycology and Protozoology Abstracts (Microbiology C)</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Genetics Abstracts</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences - PNAS</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Heck, Patrick R.</au><au>Chabris, Christopher F.</au><au>Watts, Duncan J.</au><au>Meyer, Michelle N.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Objecting to experiments even while approving of the policies or treatments they compare</atitle><jtitle>Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences - PNAS</jtitle><date>2020-08-11</date><risdate>2020</risdate><volume>117</volume><issue>32</issue><spage>18948</spage><epage>18950</epage><pages>18948-18950</pages><issn>0027-8424</issn><eissn>1091-6490</eissn><abstract>We resolve a controversy over two competing hypotheses about why people object to randomized experiments: 1) People unsurprisingly object to experiments only when they object to a policy or treatment the experiment contains, or 2) people can paradoxically object to experiments even when they approve of implementing either condition for everyone. Using multiple measures of preference and test criteria in five preregistered within-subjects studies with 1,955 participants, we find that people often disapprove of experiments involving randomization despite approving of the policies or treatments to be tested.</abstract><cop>Washington</cop><pub>National Academy of Sciences</pub><pmid>32719133</pmid><doi>10.1073/pnas.2009030117</doi><tpages>3</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0819-3890</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5005-4961</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5497-8803</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7379-7378</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0027-8424 |
| ispartof | Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences - PNAS, 2020-08, Vol.117 (32), p.18948-18950 |
| issn | 0027-8424 1091-6490 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_7430984 |
| source | Jstor Complete Legacy; PubMed Central; Alma/SFX Local Collection; Free Full-Text Journals in Chemistry |
| subjects | BRIEF REPORTS Experiments Policies Randomization Social Sciences |
| title | Objecting to experiments even while approving of the policies or treatments they compare |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-24T15%3A57%3A25IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Objecting%20to%20experiments%20even%20while%20approving%20of%20the%20policies%20or%20treatments%20they%20compare&rft.jtitle=Proceedings%20of%20the%20National%20Academy%20of%20Sciences%20-%20PNAS&rft.au=Heck,%20Patrick%20R.&rft.date=2020-08-11&rft.volume=117&rft.issue=32&rft.spage=18948&rft.epage=18950&rft.pages=18948-18950&rft.issn=0027-8424&rft.eissn=1091-6490&rft_id=info:doi/10.1073/pnas.2009030117&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_pubme%3E26968665%3C/jstor_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2432885481&rft_id=info:pmid/32719133&rft_jstor_id=26968665&rfr_iscdi=true |