Lessons Learned from the “Trick-or-Treat Study”

One of my favorite social/social psychology perception Studies are what I have come to refer to as Study trick or treating. Specifically, I’m talking about research by Diener and colleagues (1976)…and what better time of year than to discuss it now?

In the study, Diener et al. He observed 1,352 children trick-or-treating at 27 confederate sites (i.e. homes where candy was offered by an experimenter) in Seattle, in order to evaluate the various effects associated with deindividuation. In particular, they studied the effects of anonymity and group dynamics related to unity and responsibility. The essence of the experiment was that children were given the opportunity to “steal” candy or money. But will they do it? Under what circumstances?

Interestingly, I also enjoy the connotations of the word “steal” in this context. For example, in the context of “stealing” candy, one might look at the issue in terms of the “impudence” of some children. However, when money is involved (even small amounts), the context may shift from “cheeky” to “criminal”. Perhaps “theft” is the right word to use; But contextually, some might see a variable being misunderstood as being too discriminatory. But I digress.

As part of the study, researchers at Confederate homes opened their doors to an unusual knock on the door and invited children trick-or-treating to take a single piece of candy from a bowl on the table. They then advise that they need to take care of something elsewhere in the house and leave. It’s worth noting that about two feet away from the candy was a bowl full of pennies and nickels (remember, this was the 1970s).

Some children came alone and others in groups. Some of the kids were asked their names and where they lived (again, this was the 1970s, a different time). In some groups, after giving instructions, the experimenter assigned the youngest child to be responsible if any extra candy was taken (i.e., because he was most likely to be scapegoated by others).

Children who were in groups tended to eat more candy more frequently (i.e., mob mentality). Children who did not give their names received the most attention (i.e., anonymity) – which is similar to wearing a mask (a good manipulation of the study, given that not all trick-or-treaters actually wear a mask to hide their identity). The highest rates of theft occurred among unidentified children in groups with variable responsibility. It is worth considering the wide-ranging implications of this study in everyday settings, which are still true in our modern world.

This does not mean that children are bad. I love children. I have a few of my own. However, kids being kids – and being people – there are certain circumstances in which we probably shouldn’t trust them, and that goes for many adults too! This Halloween, if you’re running out of candy, be the one attentive From your candy bowls (and your pennies) when you open your doors to the masked kids in droves!