Bogus Pipeline
Also known as: Bogus Pipeline Procedure, Fake Lie Detector Method, Pipeline-to-the-Truth Technique
The bogus pipeline, devised by Jones and Sigall in 1971, is a methodological technique for reducing social-desirability bias in the measurement of attitudes, especially sensitive ones such as prejudice. Participants are connected to an impressive-looking apparatus and convinced that it functions as an accurate lie detector capable of revealing their true feelings. Believing that dishonesty will be exposed, participants are motivated to report their attitudes truthfully rather than giving socially acceptable answers. In the classic procedure participants are asked to predict what the machine will say about them, which encourages them to consult and disclose their genuine attitudes. By comparing reports given under the bogus pipeline with ordinary self-reports, researchers can estimate the extent of social-desirability distortion and obtain more candid measures of socially sensitive attitudes. The technique was an early and influential solution to a fundamental problem in attitude measurement.
Key highlights
- Reduces social-desirability bias in reports of sensitive attitudes.
- Yields an estimate of the magnitude of self-presentation distortion.
- Useful for validating implicit and indirect attitude measures.
- Historically demonstrated more candid reporting of prejudice.
Intuition
This section is available to Pro members. Upgrade to Pro
How it works
This section is available to Pro members. Upgrade to Pro
When to use it
Use the bogus pipeline when measuring attitudes that are vulnerable to social-desirability bias -- prejudice, stereotypes, socially sensitive preferences -- and when you want a more candid self-report or an estimate of how much ordinary measures are distorted. It is valuable for validating implicit measures and for research where honest disclosure is otherwise unlikely. It is less appropriate when the deception is ethically unacceptable, when participants are likely to see through the apparatus, or when implicit measures or anonymized indirect techniques (such as the list experiment) can achieve the same end with less deception. Convincing apparatus, a credible demonstration, suspicion checks, and full debriefing are essential, and the technique is logistically demanding.
Strengths & limitations
- Reduces social-desirability bias in reports of sensitive attitudes.
- Yields an estimate of the magnitude of self-presentation distortion.
- Useful for validating implicit and indirect attitude measures.
- Historically demonstrated more candid reporting of prejudice.
- Depends on elaborate deception and a convincing apparatus, raising ethics and logistics concerns.
- Loses effectiveness if participants doubt the machine.
- Increasingly impractical as people are sophisticated about lie detection.
- Cannot be administered anonymously or at scale like questionnaire-based indirect methods.
Common pitfalls
This section is available to Pro members. Upgrade to Pro
Applications
This section is available to Pro members. Upgrade to Pro
Frequently asked
How does the bogus pipeline reduce dishonest answering?
Participants are convinced that an apparatus is an accurate lie detector that will reveal their true attitudes. Believing that lying will be exposed and embarrassing, they are motivated to report honestly rather than give socially acceptable answers. Often they are asked to predict what the machine will say, which prompts honest self-consultation.
What does comparing pipeline and self-report reveal?
The difference between attitudes reported under the bogus pipeline and those given on an ordinary questionnaire estimates the magnitude of social-desirability bias. When pipeline reports are more negative for sensitive attitudes such as prejudice, it indicates that standard self-reports were distorted by self-presentation, and the pipeline value is treated as the more candid estimate.
Why is the technique used less often today?
It depends on elaborate deception and a convincing apparatus, raising ethical concerns and logistical demands, and modern participants are more sophisticated about lie detection, which can undermine the bluff. It also cannot be administered anonymously or at scale. As a result, researchers often prefer implicit measures or anonymized indirect techniques, using the bogus pipeline mainly as a validation benchmark.
Sources
- 1.Jones, E. E., & Sigall, H. (1971). The bogus pipeline: A new paradigm for measuring affect and attitude. Psychological Bulletin, 76(5), 349-364.
You have read it. What now?
Cite this page
ScholarGate. (2026, June 23). Bogus Pipeline. ScholarGate. https://scholargate.app/social-psychology/bogus-pipeline