David A. Neequaye, Pär Anders Granhag, Andreas Segerberg, Daniel Petterson
{"title":"在实验室实验中检查非法网络,初步侧重于通信","authors":"David A. Neequaye, Pär Anders Granhag, Andreas Segerberg, Daniel Petterson","doi":"10.1111/lcrp.12230","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Purpose</h3>\n \n <p>This research introduces a web application, the bot orchestrator, to assist researchers in developing paradigms to examine illicit networks in experiments. We implemented the application and a new paradigm to create mock networks using strangers. The proof-of-concept experiment examined communication when networks plan illicit activities.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Method</h3>\n \n <p>Participants assumed the role of an illicit network member—either a manager, a coordinator or an executor. They held some information the group needed to accomplish either a material or ideological goal: communication between the roles was imperative for success. We also manipulated the level of risk associated with communicating about the planning activities. For half of the participants, there was a moderate risk of communicating about the plans. For the other half, the risk of such communication was high. The procedure allowed us to examine who a network member was willing to communicate with, given the goal under pursuit and the associated risk level.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Although goal-type, risk level, and the Goal-type × Risk Interaction did not significantly predict communication decisions, a content analysis suggested that participants were attempting to navigate the risks while pursuing their goals. Participants employed diverse communication strategies: individual differences explained the most variance regarding how network members communicate.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>We hope the web application and paradigm this research introduces will facilitate further experiments examining illicit networks.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":2,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/lcrp.12230","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Examining illicit networks in laboratory experiments with a preliminary focus on communication\",\"authors\":\"David A. Neequaye, Pär Anders Granhag, Andreas Segerberg, Daniel Petterson\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/lcrp.12230\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Purpose</h3>\\n \\n <p>This research introduces a web application, the bot orchestrator, to assist researchers in developing paradigms to examine illicit networks in experiments. We implemented the application and a new paradigm to create mock networks using strangers. The proof-of-concept experiment examined communication when networks plan illicit activities.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Method</h3>\\n \\n <p>Participants assumed the role of an illicit network member—either a manager, a coordinator or an executor. They held some information the group needed to accomplish either a material or ideological goal: communication between the roles was imperative for success. We also manipulated the level of risk associated with communicating about the planning activities. For half of the participants, there was a moderate risk of communicating about the plans. For the other half, the risk of such communication was high. The procedure allowed us to examine who a network member was willing to communicate with, given the goal under pursuit and the associated risk level.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results</h3>\\n \\n <p>Although goal-type, risk level, and the Goal-type × Risk Interaction did not significantly predict communication decisions, a content analysis suggested that participants were attempting to navigate the risks while pursuing their goals. Participants employed diverse communication strategies: individual differences explained the most variance regarding how network members communicate.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\\n \\n <p>We hope the web application and paradigm this research introduces will facilitate further experiments examining illicit networks.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":2,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ACS Applied Bio Materials\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-09-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/lcrp.12230\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ACS Applied Bio Materials\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/lcrp.12230\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/lcrp.12230","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Examining illicit networks in laboratory experiments with a preliminary focus on communication
Purpose
This research introduces a web application, the bot orchestrator, to assist researchers in developing paradigms to examine illicit networks in experiments. We implemented the application and a new paradigm to create mock networks using strangers. The proof-of-concept experiment examined communication when networks plan illicit activities.
Method
Participants assumed the role of an illicit network member—either a manager, a coordinator or an executor. They held some information the group needed to accomplish either a material or ideological goal: communication between the roles was imperative for success. We also manipulated the level of risk associated with communicating about the planning activities. For half of the participants, there was a moderate risk of communicating about the plans. For the other half, the risk of such communication was high. The procedure allowed us to examine who a network member was willing to communicate with, given the goal under pursuit and the associated risk level.
Results
Although goal-type, risk level, and the Goal-type × Risk Interaction did not significantly predict communication decisions, a content analysis suggested that participants were attempting to navigate the risks while pursuing their goals. Participants employed diverse communication strategies: individual differences explained the most variance regarding how network members communicate.
Conclusions
We hope the web application and paradigm this research introduces will facilitate further experiments examining illicit networks.