Under Cover: The Hidden Costs of Infiltration

Abstract

C onsider the movie The Sting. In that lighthearted film, Paul Newman and Robert Redford (or, rather, the characters they acted) devised a Big Con, outwitting the gambler played by Robert Shaw. They created an entire reality-a Chicago betting parlor-for Shaw's observation, even if not for his benefit. As viewers we took delight in knowing what Shaw did not-that nothing was as it appeared to be, and that he was about to pay a big price for his faith in what Erving Goffman has helped us to recognize as normal appearances.1 Now think of the well-known social science experiments carried out by Stanley Milgram. Two people come to a psychology laboratory-one is designated a teacher and the other a learner. The experimenter explains that the research is concerned with the effects of punishment on learning. The teacher believes that he is inflicting everincreasing electric shocks on the learner, when he responds incorrectly to questioning. But the learner is not just another subject, but an actor, who receives no shock at all yet protests his pain vehemently to the naive subject/ teacher. This kind of con game has been justified as leading to important knowledge about the psychology of obedience.2 Finally, consider this familiar scene, which was replayed frequently on television screens. A white-robed sheik sits in a hotel room talking to a parade of elected officials, describing his problem in obtaining legal entry into the United States and offering cash in return for help. His story elicits boastful promises and eager offers of assistance. The sheik, of course, was no Arab but an FBI undercover agent. The Abscam operation is yet another example of a con game, this one justified by its potential to expose corrupt public servants. Yet what if Newman and Redford had gained their revenge by beating up their victim instead of outwitting him? Or, what if the learner in Milgram's experiment had actually received the purported electric shocks, so that at least one importantly deceptive aspect of the experiment had become altogether genuine? And, finally, what if the sheik had kidnapped one of the official's children (or even pets) in an effort to see if the ransom might include betrayal of public confidence? Presumably we would feel differently about these revised situations, though it is worthwhile to ask why. Is physical