Nav: Home

Under time pressure, people tell us what we want to hear

October 11, 2019

When asked to answer questions quickly and impulsively, people tend to respond with a socially desirable answer rather than an honest one, a set of experiments shows.

The findings, published in Psychological Science, a journal of the Association for Psychological Science, raise questions about a time-honored experimental technique, said John Protzko, a University of California, Santa Barbara (UCSB) cognitive scientist who co-led the study with colleague Claire Zedelius.

"The method of 'answer quickly and without thinking', a long staple in psychological research, may be doing many things, but one thing it does is make people lie to you and tell you what they think you want to hear," Protzko said. "This may mean we have to revisit the interpretation of a lot of research findings that use the 'answer quickly' technique.

"The idea has always been that we have a divided mind -- an intuitive, animalistic type and a more rational type," he continued. "And the more rational type is assumed to always be constraining the lower order mind. If you ask people to answer quickly and without thinking, it's supposed to give you sort of a secret access to that lower order mind."

To test this assumption, Protzko, Zedelius and their UCSB colleague Jonathan Schooler devised a test of 10 simple yes-or-no questions, such as "I sometimes feel resentful when I don't get my way," and "No matter who I'm talking to, I'm always a good listener." Through a survey, respondents were asked to take fewer than 11 seconds, or alternatively, more than 11 seconds to answer each question.They found that the fast-answering group was more likely to give socially-desireable answers, while the slow answerers and the ones who were not given any time constraints (fast or slow) were less likely to do so, Protzko said.

In a subsequent experiment, the researchers set out to learn whether people tend to give socially acceptable responses under time pressure because they view themselves as genuinely virtuous -- a phenomenon referred to as the good-true-self bias. The researchers had another group of participants respond to the questions under varying time restrictions. The respondents then participated in a social-judgment task designed to assess the degree to which they ascribe morally good and bad behavior to the true self. Those who scored lower on the good-true-self bias scale (i.e., they thought people were more a mix of good and bad qualities) should presumably be less prone to give socially desirable responses under time pressure.

However, what the researchers found was that individuals scoring high on the good-true-self measure gave highly socially desirable answers in general, but especially so when they were given ample time to deliberate. In contrast, it was low scorers who adjusted their responses by responding in a more socially desirable way under time pressure.

In other words time pressure does not bring out a person's good "true self.

Under time pressure, people may default to their desire to appear virtuous, even if it means misrepresenting themselves, Protzko concluded.

He and his colleagues plan to examine previous studies that used the quick-answer technique to see how much results might be driven by participants giving socially desireable answers.
-end-
The study was supported by the Fetzer Franklin Fund. All materials have been made publicly available via the Open Science Framework. This article has received badges for Open Data, Open Materials, and Preregistration. The complete Open Practices Disclosure for this article can be found at http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/suppl/10.1177/0956797619867939.

Association for Psychological Science

Related Bad Behavior Articles:

Bad to the bone or just bad behavior?
A new study out of Columbia University suggests that the way we perceive others' bad behavior -- as either biological and innate or potentially changeable -- impacts our willingness to cut them some slack.
Why stress and anxiety aren't always bad
People generally think of stress and anxiety as negative concepts, but while both stress and anxiety can reach unhealthy levels, psychologists have long known that both are unavoidable -- and that they often play a helpful, not harmful, role in our daily lives, according to a presentation at the annual convention of the American Psychological Association.
A first bad apple spoils the bunch
People are more likely to judge the performance of a group based on member's that are labelled as first or number one than they are on any other member, according to new research led by Cass Business School academic Dr Janina Steinmetz.
Root canal work not so bad after all
Root canal work is not as bad as people think when compared to other dental procedures.
Was the restaurant really that bad -- Or was it just the rain?
There are a few things that will result in poor customer reviews of a restaurant: bad service, bad food -- and bad weather.
SHANK3: the good, the bad and the hopeful
New approach brings a better understanding of Phelan-McDermid syndrome and SHANK3.
Losing neurons can sometimes not be that bad
Current thinking about Alzheimer's disease is that neuronal cell death in the brain is to blame for the cognitive havoc caused by the disease.
Falls are more likely when you've had a bad night sleep
Disturbances during sleep decreases capability to control posture and balance according to researchers from the Department of Engineering and Warwick Medical School at the University of Warwick who have an article published today in Scientific Reports.
When good macrophages go bad
Researchers at Children's Hospital Los Angeles discover how some cancer cells communicate with macrophages to protect tumors.
Going to bed with your ex might not be as bad you think
Conventional wisdom holds that people set themselves up for even greater heartache when they jump into bed with their ex-partner after a breakup.
More Bad Behavior News and Bad Behavior Current Events

Best Science Podcasts 2019

We have hand picked the best science podcasts for 2019. Sit back and enjoy new science podcasts updated daily from your favorite science news services and scientists.
Now Playing: TED Radio Hour

Rethinking Anger
Anger is universal and complex: it can be quiet, festering, justified, vengeful, and destructive. This hour, TED speakers explore the many sides of anger, why we need it, and who's allowed to feel it. Guests include psychologists Ryan Martin and Russell Kolts, writer Soraya Chemaly, former talk radio host Lisa Fritsch, and business professor Dan Moshavi.
Now Playing: Science for the People

#538 Nobels and Astrophysics
This week we start with this year's physics Nobel Prize awarded to Jim Peebles, Michel Mayor, and Didier Queloz and finish with a discussion of the Nobel Prizes as a way to award and highlight important science. Are they still relevant? When science breakthroughs are built on the backs of hundreds -- and sometimes thousands -- of people's hard work, how do you pick just three to highlight? Join host Rachelle Saunders and astrophysicist, author, and science communicator Ethan Siegel for their chat about astrophysics and Nobel Prizes.