ArticlePloS one2024
Experimental economics for machine learning-a methodological contribution on lie detection.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In this paper, we investigate how technology has contributed to experimental economics in the past and illustrate how experimental economics can contribute to technological progress in the future. We argue that with machine learning (ML), a new technology is at hand, where for the first time experimental economics can contribute to enabling substantial improvement of technology. At the same time, ML opens up new questions for experimental research because it can generate previously impossible observations. To demonstrate this, we focus on algorithms trained to detect lies. Such algorithms are of high relevance for research in economics as they deal with the ability to retrieve otherwise private information. We deduce that most of the commonly applied data sets for the training of lie detection algorithms could be improved by applying the toolbox of experimental economics. To illustrate this, we replicate the "lies in disguise-experiment" by Fischbacher and Föllmi-Heusi with a modification regarding monitoring. The modified setup guarantees a certain level of privacy from the experimenter yet allows to record the subjects as they lie to the camera. Despite monitoring, our results indicate the same lying behavior as in the original experiment. Yet, our experiment allows an individual-level analysis of experimental data and the generation of a lie detection algorithm with an accuracy rate of 67%, which we present in this article.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.