The effects of prebriefing misinformed research participants on their attributions of responsibility

Richard L. Wiener, Patricia V. Erker

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

10 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Participants read standard informed consent statements. Half of the participants, the prebriefed group, read statements alerting them to the possibility that they might be intentionally misinformed. All participants then read a series of arguments summarizing the transcripts of an actual rape trial and rated the extent of defendant and complainant responsabilites. Half of the participants were misinformed concerning the correct outcome of the trial. Although the defendant was actually convicted, half of the participants were told before they read the summaries that the verdict was guilty, and half were told that it was not guilty. Attributions of responsibility and evaluations of culpability were compared to measure the effects of prebriefing. Effects found for the verdict manipulation were unaffected by the prebriefing information.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)397-410
Number of pages14
JournalJournal of Psychology: Interdisciplinary and Applied
Volume120
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Jul 1986

Fingerprint

Rape
Informed Consent
attribution
responsibility
Research
rape
manipulation
Attribution
Responsibility
evaluation
Group
Evaluation
Informed consent
Manipulation

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Business, Management and Accounting (miscellaneous)
  • Education
  • Psychology(all)

Cite this

The effects of prebriefing misinformed research participants on their attributions of responsibility. / Wiener, Richard L.; Erker, Patricia V.

In: Journal of Psychology: Interdisciplinary and Applied, Vol. 120, No. 4, 07.1986, p. 397-410.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{42bf4bf963614da89625178c8166e65f,
title = "The effects of prebriefing misinformed research participants on their attributions of responsibility",
abstract = "Participants read standard informed consent statements. Half of the participants, the prebriefed group, read statements alerting them to the possibility that they might be intentionally misinformed. All participants then read a series of arguments summarizing the transcripts of an actual rape trial and rated the extent of defendant and complainant responsabilites. Half of the participants were misinformed concerning the correct outcome of the trial. Although the defendant was actually convicted, half of the participants were told before they read the summaries that the verdict was guilty, and half were told that it was not guilty. Attributions of responsibility and evaluations of culpability were compared to measure the effects of prebriefing. Effects found for the verdict manipulation were unaffected by the prebriefing information.",
author = "Wiener, {Richard L.} and Erker, {Patricia V.}",
year = "1986",
month = "7",
doi = "10.1080/00223980.1986.9712638",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "120",
pages = "397--410",
journal = "Journal of Psychology: Interdisciplinary and Applied",
issn = "0022-3980",
publisher = "Routledge",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The effects of prebriefing misinformed research participants on their attributions of responsibility

AU - Wiener, Richard L.

AU - Erker, Patricia V.

PY - 1986/7

Y1 - 1986/7

N2 - Participants read standard informed consent statements. Half of the participants, the prebriefed group, read statements alerting them to the possibility that they might be intentionally misinformed. All participants then read a series of arguments summarizing the transcripts of an actual rape trial and rated the extent of defendant and complainant responsabilites. Half of the participants were misinformed concerning the correct outcome of the trial. Although the defendant was actually convicted, half of the participants were told before they read the summaries that the verdict was guilty, and half were told that it was not guilty. Attributions of responsibility and evaluations of culpability were compared to measure the effects of prebriefing. Effects found for the verdict manipulation were unaffected by the prebriefing information.

AB - Participants read standard informed consent statements. Half of the participants, the prebriefed group, read statements alerting them to the possibility that they might be intentionally misinformed. All participants then read a series of arguments summarizing the transcripts of an actual rape trial and rated the extent of defendant and complainant responsabilites. Half of the participants were misinformed concerning the correct outcome of the trial. Although the defendant was actually convicted, half of the participants were told before they read the summaries that the verdict was guilty, and half were told that it was not guilty. Attributions of responsibility and evaluations of culpability were compared to measure the effects of prebriefing. Effects found for the verdict manipulation were unaffected by the prebriefing information.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0039625575&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0039625575&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1080/00223980.1986.9712638

DO - 10.1080/00223980.1986.9712638

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:0039625575

VL - 120

SP - 397

EP - 410

JO - Journal of Psychology: Interdisciplinary and Applied

JF - Journal of Psychology: Interdisciplinary and Applied

SN - 0022-3980

IS - 4

ER -