Bogus Pipeline: Valid Procedure or Ghostly Dream? (Discussions in Social Sciences)

The article is devoted to analysis of the bogus pipeline (BPL) procedure in the context of half a century of methodological discussions in modern social sciences. The method, first proposed by E. Jones and G. Sigal in 1971, is intended to reduce social desirability and obtain more reliable responses of subjects in psychological and sociological studies. A detailed description of this method and its basic organizational and technical versions are given. Advantages and disadvantages of the method, its capabilities and limitations are evaluated. Problems of validity, statistical efficiency and ethical acceptability of the BPL, as subject of ongoing scientific controversy, are discussed. The main factors influencing the effectiveness of the method are highlighted. Comparing possibilities of two versions of BPL (classical and verbal) in stimulating sincere answers it is stated that the verbal modification of the method, based on the expectation of a possible verification of respondents' self-reports, can be no less successful than its classical version. The high productivity of this version in the study of sensitive issues in various thematic areas of social knowledge and research practice is justified on the materials of many empirical studies. The BPL ethical aspects are discussed in terms of two theoretical perspectives: deontological and utilitarian. The arguments of the polemic parties are analyzed. Ethical correctness of the method and its practical applicability is proved not only in social and psychological studies, but also in mass sociological surveys.

Keywords

bogus pipeline procedure (BPL), survey research, experiment, sincerity of answers, social desirability, validity of data, ethical acceptability of BPL

Received

13.03.2020

Publication date

16.03.2020

Number of characters

28224

Cite

GOST	Myagkov A. Bogus Pipeline: Valid Procedure or «Ghostly Dream»? (Discussions in Social Sciences) // Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya – 2020. – Issue 3 C. 121-130 [Electronic resource]. URL: http://ras.jes.su/socis/s013216250008797-9-1-en (circulation date: 20.04.2024). DOI: 10.31857/S013216250008797-9
MLA	Myagkov, Alexander Yu. "Bogus Pipeline: Valid Procedure or «Ghostly Dream»? (Discussions in Social Sciences)." Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya 3 (2020):121-130. DOI: 10.31857/S013216250008797-9
APA	Myagkov A. (2020). Bogus Pipeline: Valid Procedure or «Ghostly Dream»? (Discussions in Social Sciences). Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya (3), pp.121-130 DOI: 10.31857/S013216250008797-9

100 rub.

When subscribing to an article or issue, the user can download PDF, evaluate the publication or contact the author. Need to register.

Number of purchasers: 0, views: 1354

Readers community rating: votes 0

1. Абушенко В.Л. Аттитьюд // Социология: энциклопедия / Сост. А.А. Грицанов, В.Л. Абушенко, Г.М. Евелькин и др. Мн.: Книжный дом, 2003. [Abushenko V.L. (2003) Attitude. In: Sociology: Enciclopedia. Compl. by A.A. Gritsanov, V.L. Abushenko, G.M. Evelkin et al. Minsk: Knizhnyj dom. (In Russ.)].

2. Мягков А.Ю. Искренность респондентов в сенситивных опросах: методы диагностики и стимулирования. Изд. 2-е, испр. и доп. М.: Вариант, 2012. [Myagkov A.Yu. (2012) Sinserity of the Respondents in Sensitive Surveys: Diagnostic and Stimulation Methods. 2nd ed., fix. and add. Moscow: Variant. (In Russ.)].

3. Мягков А.Ю.Техника «непарных чисел: опыт экспериментального тестирования // Социологические исследования. 2016. № 1. С. 37–48. [Myagkov A.Yu. (2016) Unmatched Count Technique: the Trial of Experimental Testing. Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya (Sociological Studies). No. 1: 37–48 (In Russ.)].

4. Adams J., Parkinson L., Sanson-Fisher R.W., Walsh R.A. (2008) Enhancing Self-report of Adolescent Smoking: The Effects of Bogus Pipeline and Anonymity. Addictive Behaviors. Vol. 33. No. 10: 1291–1296.

5. Aguinis H., Handelsman M.M. (1997) Ethical Issues in the Use of the Bogus Pipeline. Journal of Applied Social Psychology. Vol. 27. No. 7: 557–573.

6. Aguinis H., Henle C.A. (2001) Empirical Essessment of the Ethics of the Bogus Pipeline. Journal of Applied Social Psychology. Vol. 31. No. 2: 352–375.

7. Aguinis H., Pierce Ch.A., Quigle B.M. (1993) Conditions under which a Bogus Pipeline Procedure Enhances the Validity of Self-reported Cigarette Smoking: A Meta-Analytic Review. Journal of Applied Social Psychology. Vol. 23. No. 5: 352–373.

8. Alexander M.G., Fisher T.D. (2003) Truth and Consequences: Using the Bogus Pipeline to Examine Sex Differences in Self-reported Sexuality. Journal of Sex Research. Vol. 40. No. 1: 27–35.

9. Black D.R., Tailor A.M., Coster D.K. (1998) Accuracy of Self-reported Body Weight: Stepped Approach Model Component Assessment. Health Education Research. Vol. 13. No. 2: 301–307.

10. Botwin E.M., Botwin G.J., Renick N.L. et al. (1984) Adolescents’ Self-reports of Tobacco, and Marijuana Use: Examining of Comparability of Video Tape, Cartoons and Verbal Bogus Pipeline Procedures. Psychological Reports. Vol. 55. No. 2: 379–386.

11. Callaghan J., Lazard L. (2011) Critical Thinking in Psychology. London: Learning Matters, Ltd.

12. Elliott E., Egan V., Grubin D. (2017) A Not So Bogus Pipeline: A Study of the Bogus Pipeline Effect and its Implications for Polygraph Testing. Polygraph. Vol. 46. No. 1: 1–9.

13. Ellis L., Hartley R.D., Walsh A. (2010) Research Methods in Criminal Justice and Criminology. An Interdisciplinary Approach. Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield Publ., Inc.

14. Erwin Ph. (2001) Attitudes and Persuasion. London: Psychology Press Ltd.

15. Fisher T.D. (2013) Gender Roles and Pressure to Be Truthful: The Bogus Pipeline Modifies Gender Differences in Sexual but not Non-sexual Behavior. Sex Roles. Vol. 68. No. 7–8: 401–414.

16. Groves R.M. (1989) Survey Errors and Survey Costs. New York: Wiley.

17. Hanmer M.J., Banks A.J., White I.K. (2014) Experiments to Reduce the Over-reporting of Voting: A Pipeline to the Truth. Political Analysis. Vol. 22. No. 1: 130–141.

18. Imhoff R., Messer M. (2019) In Search of Experimental Evidence for Secondary Anti-semitism: A File Draver Report. Meta-Psychology. Vol. 3. No. 1: 1–22.

19. Jones E.E., Sigall H. (1971) The Bogus Pipeline: A New Paradigm for Measuring Affect and Attitude. Psychological Bulletin. Vol. 76. No. 2: 349–364.

20. Kokish R., Levenson J.S., Blasingame G.D. (2005) Post-conviction Sex Offender Polygraph Examination: Client-reported Perceptions of Utility and Accuracy. Sexual Abuse: Journal of Recearch and Treatment. Vol. 17. No. 2: 211–221.

21. Lindijer B.P. (2013) Honesty is the Best Policy: Using the Bogus Pipeline as an Alternative Means to Assess How Much Children Really Like Themselves. URL: https://dspace.library.uu.nl/handle/1874/277577 (accessed 5.12.2019).

22. Lowe J.B., Windsor R.A., Adams B. et al. (1986) Use of a Bogus Pipeline Method to Increase Accuracy of Self-reported Alcohol Consumption Among Pregnant Women. Journal of Studies on Alcohol. Vol. 47. No. 1: 173–175.

23. Maile C. (2015) Effectiveness of Psychological Techniques in Increasing Deviant Sexual Fantasy Self-disclosures. A Dissertation. New York. URL: https://academicworks.cuny.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2045&context=gc_etds (accessed 12.12.2019).

24. Nier J.A. (2005) How Dissociated Are Implicit and Explicit Racial Attitude? A Bogus Pipeline Approach. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations. Vol. 8. No. 1: 39–52.

25. Ostrom T.M. (1973) The Bogus Pipeline: a New Ignis Fatuus? Psychological Bulletin. Vol. 79. No. 2: 252–259.

26. Roese N.J., Jamieson D.W. (1993) Twenty Years of Bogus Pipeline Research: A Critical Review and Meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin. Vol. 114. No. 2: 363–375.

27. Rӧmer U., Mubhof O., Weber R., Turvey C.G. (2017) Truth and Consequences: Bogus Pipeline Experiment in Informal Small Business Landing. URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/156679/1/883572125.pdf (accessed 13.12.2019).

28. Sharpe D., Adair J.G., Roese N.J. (1992) Twenty Years of Deception Research: A Decline of Subjects’ Trust? Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. Vol. 18. No. 5: 585–590.

29. Strang E., Peterson Z.D. (2016) Use of a Bogus Pipeline to Detect Men’s Underreporting of Sexually Aggressive Behavior. Journal of Interpersonal Violence. December 5. DOI: 10.1177/0886260516681157.

30. Tourangeau R., Rips L., Rasinski K. (2000) The Psychology of Survey Response. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press.

31. Tsai Ch.-L. (2016) Solutions to Turnout Over-reporting: What is out There, What Works, and Can We Do Better? A Thesis Submitted for the Degree of PhD. University of Essex. URL: http://repository.essex.ac.uk/20022/1/PhD%20Thesis_Chi-lin%20Tsai.pdf (accessed 8.12.2019).

32. Wagenaar A.C., Comro K.A., McGovern P. et al. (1993) Effects of the Saliva Test Pipeline Procedure of Adolescent Self-reported Alcohol Use. Addiction.Vol. 88. No. 1: 199–208.

33. Walker R., Jussim L. (2002) Do People Lie to Appear Unprejudiced. The Rutgers Scholar. An Electronic Bulletin of Undergraduate Research. Vol. 4: 1–18. URL: http://rutgersscholar.Rutgers.edu/volume04/walkjuss/walkjuss.htm (accessed 10.09. 2018).

34. Ward C. (1978) Methodological Problems in Attitude Measurement: Sex Roles, Social Approval, and the Bogus Pipeline. Representative Research in Social Psychology. Vol. 9. No. 1: 64–68.

35. Yoong S.L., Carey M.L., D’Este C. et al. (2013) Agreement between Self-reported and Measured Weight and Height Collected in General Practice Patient: A Prospective Study. BMC Medical Research Methodology. Vol. 13: 38. DOI: 10.1186/1471-2288-13-38.