I don't mind using "participant," "respondent," or a similar term when my subjects (that is, experimental units) are humans, but I resist referring to rats or jellyfish polyps or mice or computers or trash cans (all of which have served as experimental units in my research) as "participants." I continue to refer to these as "subjects," and, in statistics class, refer to all experimental units as "subjects," (or "cases") a convenient, generic term. I have encountered resistance to describing trash cans and computers as "subjects," even when they were clearly the experimental unit, statistically speaking.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Karl L. Wuensch, Department of Psychology, East Carolina University, Greenville NC 27858-4353 Voice: 252-328-4102 Fax: 252-328-6283 [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://core.ecu.edu/psyc/wuenschk/klw.htm -----Original Message----- From: Patricia Spiegel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, June 17, 2004 10:17 AM To: Teaching in the Psychological Sciences Subject: Re: Subject, No Participant, Yes! I've not used the term "subject" for years. Whereas I think it is silly to think of research participants as "partners" (another term that was under consideration), subject ("subjected to") seems unduly feudal. Tricia Keith-Spiegel, PhD - --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
