Cookies on this website

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you click 'Accept all cookies' we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies and you won't see this message again. If you click 'Reject all non-essential cookies' only necessary cookies providing core functionality such as security, network management, and accessibility will be enabled. Click 'Find out more' for information on how to change your cookie settings.

When experimental participants are given the chance to reflect and revise their initial judgments in a dynamic conversational context, do their responses to philosophical scenarios differ from responses to those same scenarios presented in a traditional static survey? In three experiments we find no consistent evidence that responses differ in these different formats. This aligns with recent findings that manipulations of reflectiveness have no effect on participants’ judgments about philosophical scenarios. Although we did not find a consistent quantitative effect of format (conversation vs. static survey), conversational experiments still provide qualitative insights into debates about how participants are understanding (or misunderstanding) the scenarios they read in experimental studies, and whether they are replacing difficult questions with questions that are more easily answered. We argue that conversational experiments—“Socratic questionnaires”—help show what is going on “under the hood” of traditional survey designs in the experimental investigation of philosophical questions.

Original publication

DOI

10.1093/9780198918905.003.0014

Type

Chapter

Book title

Oxford Studies in Experimental Philosophy Volume 5

Publication Date

01/01/2024

Pages

331 - 374