Suspicion About Suspicion Probes: Ways Forward

Daniel W. Barrett, Steven L. Neuberg

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

Suspicion probes are the traditional tool employed to assess the extent to which participants suspect intentional misdirection or deception within the research context. A primary reason psychologists use deception in research settings is to prevent participants from altering their behavior in light of knowing what is being studied, which could undermine internal validity as well as threaten the generalizability of findings to the real world (i.e., external validity). The present article elucidates a number of challenges with suspicion probes. A definition and framework for conceptualizing the construct of suspicion in research settings are proposed. Following a literature review, an analysis of existing evidence, and new data on the prevalence of using and reporting suspicion probes, we conclude that suspicion is a likely problem in research practice. We provide a decision guide to help researchers navigate the numerous choices involved in addressing potential suspicion and call for a combination of (a) renewed research leading to empirically supported tools and best practices and (b) systemic changes to editorial policies, funding practices, professional standards, and research training that would increase rigor and focus on this aspect of research methodology.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalPerspectives on Psychological Science
DOIs
StateAccepted/In press - 2023
Externally publishedYes

Keywords

  • deception
  • postexperiment interview
  • suspicion
  • suspicion probe

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • General Psychology

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Suspicion About Suspicion Probes: Ways Forward'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this