Manipulations, Dependent Measures, and Expectations The influence of physical pain on decision-making processes in experimental interrogation scenarios Shannon C. Houck Meredith A. Repke Lucian Gideon Conway III Kimberly Parrow Introduction Design Overview Figure Is causing persons physical pain an effective way to persuade them to tell you secret information? This question is fundamental to a frequently-debated topic: The effectiveness of torture. This paper describes a new experimental method to ethically investigate one component of torture: The influence of physical pain on decisions to reveal secret or false information. Despite extensive discussion, there is limited scientific research on torture’s effectiveness. The existing body of evidence has primarily focused on circumstances when people are more likely to endorse torture use (Homant & Witkowski, 2011; Houck & Conway, 2013), what leads people to perceive the torture victim as guilty (Gray & Wegner, 2011), and what causes people to believe that torture will be effective (Houck, Conway, & Repke, in press). While this prior research is useful, there is nonetheless little known experimental work relevant to how people behave and make decisions while experiencing physical torture, or the degree to which pain is an effective information retrieval tool in practice. The present study aims to help bridge this gap by testing a methodology for investigating the effect of increased levels of physical pain on persons’ willingness to reveal secret information or false information in order to escape the pain. Participants played a game against an opponent (actually a confederate) while simultaneously experiencing a Cold Pressor Test (CPT) associated with various levels of pain. As part of the game, participants designated a hiding location for a marble, and were tasked with keeping the hiding location a secret from their opponent. Their opponent repeatedly questioned them about the location of the marble, and verbally pressured them to reveal the secret information. Participants could choose to give false or true information to their opponent. Giving false information decreased their odds of winning the game (for which they believed they would receive additional credit points), but allowed them a temporary reprieve from the pain. Manipulations, Dependent Measures, and Expectations Primary Manipulation CPT Temperature (Level of Pain). Participants played the game with their hand submerged into one of three possible water temperatures (1 degree C, 5 degrees C, or 10 degrees C). Dependent Measures (1) Manipulation Check: Overall Pain. Participants answered questions relevant to the level and type of pain experienced during the game. Items were averaged into an Overall Pain score (α= .84). (2) Revealing False Information. The experimenter recorded when participants chose to give false information. (3) Revealing True Information. The experimenter recorded when participants voluntarily chose to reveal the true location of the marble. No participants revealed true information in this study. Analytic Strategy In addition to testing for a linear trend for colder temperatures to produce more false information, we also tested each condition against the expected mean in a no-pain condition (participants would have no motive to reveal any information in that condition, and thus the expected mean would be zero). Discussion This study offers initial validation of an experimental method that isolates psychological processes related to torture efficacy and tests them in an ethical way. While this method cannot of course directly show what would happen in extreme torture scenarios, it can potentially demonstrate the psychological connection between some elements of those scenarios and outcomes that are the source of the debate. Given the difficulty of the topic to study, the importance of the topic, and the lack of credible research, this is no small gap to fill. These results offer preliminary evidence that increased pain may cause persons to reveal false information; our hope is that future researchers will adapt this method to study this topic in more depth. Results Results Colder water temperatures were associated with more pain (standardized Beta = -.47, p= .008). One-sample t-tests revealed that participants showed significantly more misleads than the expected no-pain distribution for the 1 degree condition (t[13] = 2.28, p = .020). This same test approached significance for the 5 degree condition (p = .083) and was weaker in the 10 degree condition (p = .170). This trend is also illustrated by correlational analyses revealing that participants were more likely to offer misleading information when the water was colder (higher pain levels), although this effect only approached significance (Beta=-.23; p=.103). Contact information References Shannon C. Houck, ABD University of Montana shannon.houck@umontana.edu Gray, K., & Wegner, D. (2010). Torture and judgments of guilt. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology , 46 , 233–235. Homant, R. J., Witkowski, M. J. (2011). Support for coercive interrogation among college students: Torture and the ticking bomb scenario. Journal of Applied Security Research, 6, 135-157. Houck, S. C., Conway, L. G., III. (2013). What people think about torture: Torture is inherently bad…unless it can save someone I love. Journal of Applied Security Research, 8, 429-454. Houck, S. C., Conway, L. G. III, & Repke, M. (in press). Personal closeness and perceived torture efficacy: If torture will save someone I’m close to, then it must work. Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology, XX, XX-XX.