IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/kyklos/v57y2004i3p457-470.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Deceptive Field Experiments of Discrimination: Are they Ethical?

Author

Listed:
  • Peter A. Riach
  • Judith Rich

Abstract

Field experiments in which bogus pairs of transactors test for discrimination by applying for employment or housing, or by trading in product markets, have been widely‐published during the last decade. However, no detailed justification has been provided for the deception involved. The general lack of veracity in the market‐place, the social harm inflicted by discrimination and the superior accuracy and transparency of this technique justify deceiving the subjects of experiments. Deception of testers, however, may do them harm, contravenes the ethical standards of psychologists and sociologists and is unnecessary, as alternative procedures are available to deal with ‘experimenter effects’. Im letzten Jahrzehnt wurden viele Feldexperimente publiziert, in denen Paare von vorgetäuschten Akteuren die Diskriminierung bei der Arbeits‐ oder Wohnungssuche oder bei Transaktionen auf Produktmärkten testen sollten. Es wurde aber keine detaillierte Rechtfertigung für die Täuschung erbracht, die mit diesen Experimenten verbunden ist. Das generelle Fehlen von Wahrhaftigkeit im Marktgeschehen, die sozialen Schäden, die durch Diskriminierung entstehen, sowie die besondere Genauigkeit und Transparenz dieser Methode rechtfertigen es, die Subjekte der Experimente zutäuschen. Hingegen kann die Täuschung der Tester diesen Schaden zufügen, widerspricht den ethischen Standards von Psychologen und Soziologen und ist unnötig, da alternative Methoden zur Verfügung stehen, um mit ‘Experimentiereffekten’ umzugehen. Ces dix dernières années, nombreux ont été les ouvrages publiés traitant de discrimination, mise en lumière par des tests menés par des couples de faux candidats à des emplois, des logements, ou des transactions commerciales. Cependant, aucune justification détaillée n'a été avancée pour la duperie liée à ces tests. Le manque général de véracité de l'économie de marché, le dommage social occasionné par une quelconque discrimination ainsi que la précision de cette technique justifient le fait de tromper les sujets de ces tests. Le fait de tromper les testeurs par contre peut leur nuire, est contraire à l'éthique des psychologues et sociologues, et est de plus superflu. En effet, il existe des procédures alternatives qui permettent de gérer les effets de l'expérience.

Suggested Citation

  • Peter A. Riach & Judith Rich, 2004. "Deceptive Field Experiments of Discrimination: Are they Ethical?," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 57(3), pages 457-470, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:kyklos:v:57:y:2004:i:3:p:457-470
    DOI: 10.1111/j.0023-5962.2004.00262.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0023-5962.2004.00262.x
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Doris Weichselbaumer, 2004. "Is It Sex or Personality? The Impact of Sex Stereotypes on Discrimination in Applicant Selection," Eastern Economic Journal, Eastern Economic Association, vol. 30(2), pages 159-186, Spring.
    2. Michael Fix & Raymond Struyk, 1993. "Clear and convincing evidence: Measurement of discrimination in america," Natural Field Experiments 00241, The Field Experiments Website.
    3. Kurt W. Rothschild, 1993. "Ethics And Economic Theory," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 379.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:kyklos:v:57:y:2004:i:3:p:457-470. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Wiley Content Delivery). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0023-5962 .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.