ScholarGate
助手

方法对比

并排查看您选择的方法;存在差异的行会高亮显示。

Bogus Pipeline×False Consensus Paradigm×
领域社会心理学社会心理学
方法族Process / pipelineProcess / pipeline
起源年份19711977
提出者Edward Jones & Harold SigallLee Ross, David Greene & Pamela House
类型Methodological technique to reduce social-desirability biasExperimental paradigm for social-perception bias
开创性文献Jones, E. E., & Sigall, H. (1971). The bogus pipeline: A new paradigm for measuring affect and attitude. Psychological Bulletin, 76(5), 349-364. DOI ↗Ross, L., Greene, D., & House, P. (1977). The 'false consensus effect': An egocentric bias in social perception and attribution processes. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 13(3), 279-301. DOI ↗
别名Bogus Pipeline Procedure, Fake Lie Detector Method, Pipeline-to-the-Truth TechniqueFalse Consensus Effect, Egocentric Projection Paradigm, Consensus Estimation Task
相关33
摘要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.The false consensus paradigm, established by Ross, Greene, and House in 1977, demonstrates a pervasive bias in social perception: people overestimate the extent to which others share their own choices, beliefs, and behaviors. In the canonical procedure, participants indicate their own position on some issue or choice -- famously, whether they would walk around campus wearing a sandwich-board sign -- and then estimate what proportion of their peers would do the same. The signature finding is that those who choose a given option estimate that option to be more common than do those who reject it, so each group projects its own response onto others. Ross and colleagues also showed that people view their own responses as relatively common and unrevealing of personality while seeing differing responses as uncommon and diagnostic of others' traits. The paradigm became a foundational demonstration of egocentric bias in social judgment and attribution.
ScholarGate数据集
  1. v1
  2. 1 来源
  3. PUBLISHED
  1. v1
  2. 1 来源
  3. PUBLISHED

前往搜索 下载幻灯片

ScholarGate方法对比: Bogus Pipeline · False Consensus Paradigm. 于 2026-06-24 检索自 https://scholargate.app/zh/compare