心理学与生活- 第113部分

Subjects　

Three　（or　four）　for　pretesting；　two　to　participate；　rest　of　class　to　be　given　research　tasks。　

Time　required　for　Research　

25…30　minutes　for　data　collection；　10…20　minutes　for　analysis　and　verdict。　

Time　Required　for　Discussion　

10　minutes　before　demonstration；　10…30　minutes　after。　（This　section　could　be　extended　over　two　class　periods。）　

Method　

1。　Before　class；　prepare　two　envelopes。　One　should　contain　the　instructions　designed　to　introduce　
413　


guilt；　the　other　contains　innocuous　instructions　（see　letters　at　the　end　of　this　section）。　The　envelopes　
should　be　identical。　In　the　guilty　letter；　you　must　indicate　a　safe　place　where　the　subject　must　go　in　
order　to　perform　the　guilty　act；　you　must　also　make　the　necessary　preparations　of　having　at　that　
place：　（a）　Three　matches；　（b）　a　“blood…stained”　（red　inked）　envelope　containing　the　victim’s　photo　
（any　photo　of　a　woman　will　do）；　（c）　a　metal　pan　in　which　the　envelope　can　be　burned。　（Find　a　
relatively　secluded　spot　for　the　guilty　suspect　to　burn　the　note　and　picture。　One　of　our　section　
leaders　found　to　his　dismay　that　a　janitor　had　thrown　the　envelope　away　shortly　before　the　section　
meeting；　another　suspect　was　interrupted　by　the　sound　of　the　fire　alarm；　set　off　by　a　very　sensitive　
smoke　detector。　These　problems　can　be　avoided　by　careful　planning。）　

3。　Bring　a　stopwatch　to　class。　
4。　Select　two　male　subjects　at　the　beginning　of　the　class　（it　is　possible　to　use　two　women　as　suspects；　
you　might　then　want　to　make　some　changes　in　the　content　of　the　letter　the　guilty　one　gets）。　
Premeasure　the　RTs　of　three　early…arriving　students　on　each　of　five　premeasured　words　（see　Word　
List）。　Select　the　two　with　most　similar　Reaction　Times　（RTs）　in　order　to　minimize　individual　
differences　in　speed　of　reaction　to　neutral　words。　If　all　three　vary　considerably；　test　a　fourth　and　use　
the　two　who　are　most　parable。　It　is　crucial　that　the　suspect　try　to　conceal　his　guilt；　pick　students　
you　believe　will　play　the　part　well　and　remind　them　to　carefully　follow　all　the　directions　they　will　
receive。　Give　one　unmarked　envelope　to　each　of　them　and　send　them　out　of　the　room　in　opposite　
directions。　Do　not　inform　the　“suspects”　about　what　will　happen　when　they　return　to　the　class；　this　
would　give　the　guilty　person　time　to　prepare　himself；　nor　should　they　talk　to　each　other　at　any　time。　
They　are　to　knock　on　the　door　when　ready　to　return。　
5。　While　the　suspects　are　out　of　the　room；　tell　the　class　the　circumstances　of　the　crime。　Explain　their　
task　and　the　scoring　procedure　they　will　use。　You　will　need　to　assign　to　students　three　roles：　
。　One　or　more　students　to　note　the　suspect’s　verbal　response。　
。　One　or　more　students　to　note　the　suspect’s　reaction　time。　
。　Two　or　more　students　to　note　significant　signs　of　expressive　behavior　acpanying　each　
verbal　response　（see　Expressive　Behavior　Encoding　Guide　and　tally　table）。　Does　the　suspect　
stutter；　answer　in　an　especially　low　or　loud　voice；　clear　throat；　cough；　sigh；　etc。？　Jot　down　
any　such　behaviors　and　code　them　as　“S”　for　a　speech　disturbance。　Does　the　suspect　shift　
in　his　seat；　cross　his　legs；　twist；　wring　his　hands　or　put　them　in　his　pockets；　fidget　with　
cigarettes；　paper　clips；　etc。？　Note　these　behaviors　and　code　them　as　“P”；　for　a　physical　
movement。　Finally；　focusing　on　the　suspect’s　face；　does　he　smile；　frown；　wet　his　lips；　close　
his　eyes；　etc？　These　behaviors　can　be　noted　and　coded　in　a　general　facial　expression　
category　as　“F”。　Code　behaviors　not　fitting　these　categories　as　“O”。　If　time　allows；　give　
students　a　chance　to　practice　their　scoring；　using　a　volunteer　“suspect”　from　the　class。　
Have　your　reaction…timer　write　the　times　on　the　data　sheet。　
6。　When　the　first　suspect　returns　and　knocks　on　the　door；　bring　him　in　and　seat　him　in　front　of　the　
class　with　his　back　to　the　timekeeper　（on　a　high；　backless　stool　if　you　have　one）　and　have　a　student　
experimenter　give　him　the　following　instructions：　“I　will　call　out　a　word　and　you　are　to　reply　
quickly　with　the　first　word　that　es　to　mind。　We　will　repeat　this　for　each　of　30　words。　That　is　all　
there　is　to　it。　Is　that　clear？”　（Minimize　questions。）　
7。　If　time　is　a　problem；　20　of　the　30　words　should　suffice；　but　pick　half　neutral　and　half　critical　ones。　
Have　your　timekeeper　erase　the　times　before　the　second　suspect　es　in。　
8。　If　the　first　subject　is　allowed　to　remain　in　class　while　the　second　is　being　tested；　he　should　sit　
behind　the　class　so　as　not　to　give　any　telling　reactions。　
9。　An　excellent　extension　of　this　demonstration；　proposed　by　Mikkel　Hansen　of　Stanford　University；　is　
to　have　students　（or　associates）　film　the　two　suspects　pleting　their　tasks。　At　the　end　of　the　class；　
after　votes　have　been　cast；　the　videos　can　be　played　to　the　section　to　dramatically　reveal　who　is　
414　


innocent　and　who　is　guilty。　

PITFALLS　TO　AVOID　

Do　not　get　too　involved　in　the　initial　discussion；　this　demonstration　requires　a　lot　of　time；　so　hold　all　but　the　
necessary　setting　of　the　context　for　afterward。　Pick　a　safe　place　for　the　burning　to　take　place。　Do　not　select　
subjects　who　are　very　expressive–the　guilty　one　might　give　it　all　away　with　the　first　blush。　

DATA　ANALYSIS　AND　INTERPRETATION　

1。　Half　of　the　stimulus　words　are　neutral；　in　the　sense　that　they　are　not　associated　with　any　aspect　of　
the　crime；　whereas　half　are　emotionally　loaded；　in　that　they　relate　to　some　details　of　the　crime　of　
which　you　and　the　“criminal；”　but　not　the　innocent　suspect；　are　aware。　Have　the　class　discuss　
which　words　should　be　counted　as　“critical”；　based　on　their　knowledge　of　the　crime。　To　help　them　
with　this；　you　may　want　to　read　a　description　of　the　crime　（the　instructions　given　to　the　suspect）。　
Then　have　them　calculate　mean　reaction　times　separately　for　both　types　of　words　for　each　suspect。　
2。　Mention　the　use　of　premeasured　RTs　for　neutral　words　and　its　function。　
3。　Was　there　a　difference　in　the　reaction　time　of　the　two　suspects　to　the　critical　words　they　had　in　
mon？　Repeat　this　analysis　for　the　other　measures。　How　would　you　explain　the　differences　you　
observed？　
4。　There　may　be　two　plex　effects　of　guilt　or　emotion　on　RT：　a　perseverance　effect　that　carries　over　to　
the　next　word　in　the　sequence；　and　a　heightened　variability　effect　of　giving　either　much　faster　or　
slower　RTs　to　the　critical　words。　This　would　yield　a　mean　parable　to　the　innocent　victim；　so　
different　statistical　methods　might　have　to　be　used　to　assess　the　significance　of　this　bimodal　
reaction　tendency　（should　it　occur）。　
5。　Ask　students　to　suggest　other　ways　of　analyzing　the　data　to　detect　guilt。　Have　them　discuss　which　
measures　seem　to　be　doing　the　best　job　of　predicting　guilt。　Using　the　measures　they　agree　on；　have　
the　students　predict　which　of　the　two　suspects　is　guilty。　Each　student　should　make　a　private　verdict　
and　give　an　estimate　of　his　or　her　confidence　in　the　verdict。　These　data　should　be　tallied　and　
presented　to　the　class。　（Once　the　verdicts　are　in；　have　the　two　suspects　return　to　the　room　for　a　
discussion　of　the　experiment。）　
6。　Are　the　three　response　measures　correlated？　How　might　they　be　bined　to　improve　their　
predictive　efficiency？　Can　they　be　refined？　Can　you　think　of　better　measures　（for　example；　asking　
each　suspect　to　make　up　a　story　using　the　critical　words）？　
DISCUSSION；　EXTENSIONS；　AND　EXPERIMENTAL　VARIATIONS　

1。　If　your　section　runs　for　one　and　one…half　hours　or　so；　you　might　add　one　or　both　of　the　following　
aspects：　（a）　a　passive　acplice　who　acpanies　the　killer　but　does　not　talk　to　him；　watches　the　
questionable　deed；　has　access　to　the　relevant　information　but　is　neither　a　blackmailer；　a　killer；　nor　a　
destroyer　of　evidence；　（b）　a　coincidental；　innocent　suspect　who；　by　happenstance；　does　some　weird　
things　that　involve　the　same　critical　words　but　is　not　guilty　of　any　crime。　For　example；　your　letter　to　
this　person　might　say　he　is　looking　for　the　sign　of　a　skull　and　cross…bones　on　a　letter　which；　when　
he　find　it　in　Room____；　he　is　to　crush　and　destroy　because　he　thinks　it　contains　a　curse；　etc。　These　
additions　make　lie　detection　less　easy　and　open　discussion　about　false…positives；　personal　
responsibility；　and　reliability。　
2。　Why　would　it　be　important　for　the　experimenter　and　the　timekeeper　not　to　know　which　suspect　was　
guilty？　
3。　Could　you　train　the　guilty　person　not　to　betray　himself　through　his　emotional　arousal？　Are　there　
people　who　have　learned　to　suppress　or　not　experience　guilt？　How　could　their　guilt　be　assessed？　
415　


4。　What　role　does　self…monitoring　play　in　being　able　to　infer　internal　states　from　external　behavior？　
5。　What　does　it　mean　to　be　“poker　faced”　or　to　have　a　face　“like　an　open　book”？　
6。　What　kinds　of　external　behavior　are　the　best　indicators　of　internal　states？　How　can　we　train　
ourselves　to　monitor　and　control　such　sources　of　channel　leakage？　
7。　What　circumstances　and　variables　lead　to　errors　and　misinterpretations　of　the　“inner　person”　from　
outer　appearances？　Also　consider　the　conditions　under　which　we　judge　a　nonparticipant　as　“shy”　
or　“bored；”　“unmotivated；”　or　“aloof；　“not　prepared”　or　“reserved。”　
8。　How　can　we　distinguish　between　generalized　arousal　（anxiety　from　being　put　into　a　novel　situation　
or　from　being　tested）　and　the　specific　motivation　stemming　from　guilt？　
9。　Sigmund　Freud　used　word　association　as　a　clue　to　detect　secrets　the　person　concealed　even　from　
him…　or　herself。　The　idea　that　repressed　thoughts　will　be　revealed　in　overt　behavior　（slips　of　the　
tongue；　strange　associations；　etc。）　is　basic　to　Freudian　psychodynamic　notions　of　the　functioning　of　
personality。　
10。　Contrast　the　methodologies　of　using　qualitative　content　analysis　of　word　associations　to　that　of　
quantitative　reaction　time　measures　to　get　at　the　“deeper”　structure　of　functioning。　Personality　
psychologists　and　lay　people　more　often　use　the　former；　while　cognitive　psychologists　tend　to　use　
the　latter。　Beyond　the　methods　of　obtaining　data；　are　there　differences　in　how　one　goes　about　
making　inferences　from　these　two　sources　of　data？　
11。　Jury　Decisions。　If　there　is　time；　an　interesting　variation　is　to　divide