| Abstract: |
The use of student subjects and deception in experiments are two controversial
issues that often raise concerns among editors and reviewers, which might
prevent quality research from being published in agricultural and resource
economics (ARE) journals. We provide a self-contained methodological
discussion of these issues. We argue that field professionals are the most
appropriate subjects for questions related to policy or measurement, and
students are the most appropriate subjects for scientific research questions
closely tied to economic theory. Active deception, where subjects are provided
with explicitly misleading information, has been avoided in the mainstream
economics discipline because it can lead to a loss of experimental control,
lead to subject selection bias, and impose negative externalities on other
researchers. Disciplinary ARE journals may want to abide by these norms
against deception to maintain credibility. Interdisciplinary ARE journals may
have more flexibility, although it is important to provide guidelines to avoid
too much reviewer-specific variation in standards. For ARE researchers, we
suggest employing a deception-free experimental design whenever possible
because we know of no field in which deception is encouraged. |