Can We Reduce Deception in Elite Field Experiments? Evidence from a Field Experiment with State Legislative Offices

IF 1.7 2区 社会学 Q2 POLITICAL SCIENCE State Politics & Policy Quarterly Pub Date : 2020-06-04 DOI:10.1177/1532440020925723
M. Landgrave
{"title":"Can We Reduce Deception in Elite Field Experiments? Evidence from a Field Experiment with State Legislative Offices","authors":"M. Landgrave","doi":"10.1177/1532440020925723","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The use of deception is common in elite correspondence audit studies. Elite audit studies are a type of field experiment used by researchers to test for discrimination against vulnerable populations seeking to access government resources. These studies have provided invaluable insights, but they have done so at the cost of using deception. They have relied on identity, activity, and motivation deception. In addition, they request unnecessary work. Is there a less deceptive alternative? In this article, I present results from a field experiment with state legislative offices that minimize the use of deception. Consistent with elite correspondence audit studies, I find evidence of discrimination against Hispanics among state legislative offices. In addition, I find that discrimination is mitigated when subjects believe their behavior will be public knowledge. This suggests that discrimination can be mitigated through increased monitoring. This article advances the discussion on how to minimize the use of deception in elite field experimentation and how to mitigate discrimination against vulnerable populations.","PeriodicalId":47181,"journal":{"name":"State Politics & Policy Quarterly","volume":"20 1","pages":"489 - 507"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2020-06-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1532440020925723","citationCount":"10","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"State Politics & Policy Quarterly","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1532440020925723","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 10

Abstract

The use of deception is common in elite correspondence audit studies. Elite audit studies are a type of field experiment used by researchers to test for discrimination against vulnerable populations seeking to access government resources. These studies have provided invaluable insights, but they have done so at the cost of using deception. They have relied on identity, activity, and motivation deception. In addition, they request unnecessary work. Is there a less deceptive alternative? In this article, I present results from a field experiment with state legislative offices that minimize the use of deception. Consistent with elite correspondence audit studies, I find evidence of discrimination against Hispanics among state legislative offices. In addition, I find that discrimination is mitigated when subjects believe their behavior will be public knowledge. This suggests that discrimination can be mitigated through increased monitoring. This article advances the discussion on how to minimize the use of deception in elite field experimentation and how to mitigate discrimination against vulnerable populations.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
我们能减少精英野外实验中的欺骗吗?州立法机构实地实验的证据
欺骗的使用在精英函授审计研究中很常见。精英审计研究是研究人员用来测试对寻求获得政府资源的弱势群体的歧视的一种实地实验。这些研究提供了宝贵的见解,但它们是以欺骗为代价的。他们依赖于身份、活动和动机的欺骗。此外,他们要求不必要的工作。有没有一种不那么欺骗性的选择?在这篇文章中,我介绍了一项州立法机构的实地实验结果,该实验最大限度地减少了欺骗的使用。与精英信件审计研究一致,我发现州立法机构中存在歧视西班牙裔的证据。此外,我发现,当受试者相信他们的行为将为公众所知时,歧视就会减轻。这表明,可以通过加强监测来减轻歧视。本文就如何在精英实地实验中尽量减少欺骗的使用以及如何减轻对弱势群体的歧视进行了讨论。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.00
自引率
6.70%
发文量
24
期刊介绍: State Politics & Policy Quarterly (SPPQ) features studies that develop general hypotheses of political behavior and policymaking and test these hypotheses using the unique methodological advantages of the states. It also includes field review essays and a section entitled “The Practical Researcher,” which is a service-oriented feature designed to provide a data, methodological, and assessment resource for those conducting research on state politics. SPPQ is the official journal of the State Politics and Policy section of the American Political Science Association and is published by the University of Illinois Press for the Institute of Legislative Studies at the University of Illinois at Springfield.
期刊最新文献
SPQ volume 23 issue 4 Cover and Front matter SPQ volume 23 issue 4 Cover and Back matter Governing Through Gridlock: Bill Composition under Divided Government Are Initiatives an End-Run Around the Legislative Process? Divided Government and Voter Support for California Initiatives Assessing a New Measure of State Policy Mood: Response to Lagodny, Jones, Koch, and Enns
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1