当前位置: X-MOL 学术Journal of Economic Psychology › 论文详情
Our official English website, www.x-mol.net, welcomes your feedback! (Note: you will need to create a separate account there.)
Not all computerized cheating tasks are equal: A comparison of computerized and non-computerized versions of a cheating task
Journal of Economic Psychology ( IF 2.5 ) Pub Date : 2020-04-21 , DOI: 10.1016/j.joep.2020.102270
Lau Lilleholt , Christoph Schild , Ingo Zettler

Computerized versions of population inferred cheating tasks (C-PICT)—i.e., tasks in which dishonesty is statistically determined on the aggregate by comparing self-reported outcomes with a known probability distribution—have become increasingly popular. To this date no study has investigated whether non-computerized population inferred cheating tasks (PICT) and C-PICT as well as different implementations of C-PICT produce similar results. The current study tackles both issues via a well-powered pre-registered online experiment (N = 3,645) with four conditions. Participants played either a non-computerized coin toss task (CTT) (C1) or one of three computerized CTT: a computerized CTT provided via an external website (C2), a computerized CTT provided within the survey framework of the study in which participants were explicitly informed that the actual outcome of the CTT was not monitored (C3), or a computerized CTT provided within the survey framework of the study in which participants were explicitly informed that the actual outcome of the CTT was monitored (C4). A priori we expected the probability of dishonesty to be higher in C1 compared to C2, C3, and C4, as well as lower in C4 compared to C3 and C2. Results show that the probability of dishonesty is higher in C1 and C2 compared to C3 and C4. Conversely, no significant difference was observed between C1 and C2, nor between C3 and C4. Taken together, our results indicate that C-PICT produce results similar to PICT when they are provided via an external website, but not when they are implemented within the survey framework of the study.



中文翻译:

并非所有的计算机化作弊任务都相等:作弊任务的计算机化版本和非计算机化版本的比较

计算机化的人口推理作弊任务(C-PICT),即通过比较自我报告的结果与已知的概率分布在统计上确定不诚实的任务,已变得越来越流行。迄今为止,尚无研究调查非计算机群体推断作弊任务(PICT)和C-PICT以及C-PICT的不同实现是否产生相似的结果。当前的研究通过功能强大的预注册在线实验(N = 3,645)在四个条件下解决了这两个问题。参与者参加了非计算机抛硬币任务(CTT)(C1)或以下三种计算机CTT之一:通过外部网站提供的计算机CTT(C2),在研究的调查框架内提供的计算机化的CTT,其中明确告知参与者未监控CTT的实际结果(C3),或在研究的调查框架内提供的计算机化的CTT,其中明确告知参与者监测了CTT的实际结果(C4)。我们先验地认为,与C2,C3和C4相比,C1中不诚实的可能性更高,而与C3和C2相比,C4中不诚实的可能性更低。结果表明,与C3和C4相比,C1和C2中不诚实的可能性更高。相反,在C1和C2之间以及C3和C4之间都没有观察到显着差异。综上所述,我们的结果表明C-PICT通过外部网站提供的结果类似于PICT,

更新日期:2020-04-21
down
wechat
bug