Verbal Reports on Mental Processes

Publisher Website
Google Scholar
Abstract
Nisbett and Wilson (1977) proposed that subjects are often unaware of important stimuli, cognitive processes, and responses, and that verbal reports concerning these are often incorrect. Following this hypothesis, the experimenter may assume that when the subjects disagree with the experimenter and his or her hypothesis, the subjects must be unaware of the process involved and are wrong. One problem with Nisbett and Wilson's hypothesis, then, is that valuable verbal reports may be abandoned when they conflict with established theories. Using the misattribution of arousal paradigm, an example of how this can happen is outlined. A warning against too free use of Nisbett and Wilson's hypothesis is given.