Do–Say Correspondence in Adults: Audience Control in a Virtual Game

Abstract

This exploratory and descriptive study used a digital game to investigate the effects of audiences on the accuracy of self-reports of 10 undergraduate students. The participants assumed the role of a prince who, being accused of murdering the king, had to navigate a labyrinthine castle to find proof of his innocence. To wander through the castle players needed to collect objects that maintained the prince’s energy, keeping him alive. Some objects provided a small amount of energy and others provided 20 times more energy but their collection was prohibited by the kingdom’s laws. At specific moments the player was questioned by different characters (audiences) about whether they had transgressed the law. There were four audiences (mother, brother, soldier, and computer) that varied in how they indicated the probability of either punishment or support. All participants completed the game and eight transgressed, collecting forbidden objects. A larger number of distorted reports, denying transgressions, were made to the audiences who signaled a higher probability of punishment, but a significant proportion of distorted reports were made even to the audiences who presented themselves as supportive and nonpunitive. Because no actual punishment for transgressions occurred in the game, reporting behavior was likely influenced by participants’ histories with audiences functionally similar to those simulated in the game.