Deceptive Design Research Articles

Two-Shots and Group Shots

Like most auteurs, there are certain familiar and cliched phrases used to discuss work of Sang-soo, most common of these being a variation on idea, all his films are same. For instance, critic Mike D'Angelo begins his review of In Another Country (2012) by declaring: Hong tends to make same movie over and over: a multi-part story in which heavily inebriated males--usually academics or filmmakers--awkwardly woo one or more bewildered females. Similarly, in his review of Oki's Movie (2010), Nick Schager states, features so many elements that have calcified into director's trademarks (solipsistic student and/or director protagonists, boozy escapades, clumsy romantic entanglements, divergent points of view, and segmented narratives) that it feels trifling at best. These statements are at once understandable and even accurate on a certain level, given large number of repetitions of narrative and character that occur in Hong's films, while also being demonstrably false, especially in terms of visual style. While Hong's visual style is both recognizable and seemingly familiar from film to film, it is constantly evolving and rather difficult to define. As a result, more attention is often given to Hong's narrative experimentation and/or thematic concerns and less to his work as a cinematic stylist (for example, Deutelbaum, Deceptive Design, Structure of Hang Sang-soo's, Pragmatic Poetics, and A Closer Look at Structure; Diffrient, South Korean Film Genres; Chung and Diffident; Kim, The Remasculinazation, Virtual Hallyu; Quandt). This essay aims at systematically quantifying and explaining how has constructed his mise-en-scene over course of his career and analyzes meanings of Hong's visual approach. While term mise-en-scene has a long and varied history of multiple definitions and meanings, this essay will focus on mise-en-scene as art of cinematic staging, further defined by Adrian Martin as the art of arranging, choreographing and displaying (Mise-en-Scene and Film Style 15). The concentration will be on two variations of Hongian shots, two-shot and group shot, and how each respectively provides examples of mannerist and classical approaches to mise-en-scene. There have been various attempts to label recent contemporary international art film style and how these films differ from classical art cinema of past. For example, Ira Jaffe's Slow Movies: Countering Cinema of Action (2014) outlines an international trend toward long takes, long shots, austere mise-en-scene, and lack of emotion and affect, a cinema where nothing happens, which includes such diverse filmmakers as Jim Jarmusch (United States), Alexander Sokurov (Russia), Nuri Bilge Ceylan (Turkey), Cristian Mungiu (Romania), Lisandro Alonso (Argentina), Pedro Costa (Portugal), Abbas Kiarostami (Iran), Jia Zhang-ke (China), and Bela Tarr (Hungary) (among others) (Jaffe 1-3). Matthew Flanagan, in his PhD thesis on cinema, lists many of same filmmakers, along with art cinema veterans such as Chantal Akerman and Theo Angelopoulos and experimental directors like James Benning and Straub/Huillet (Flanagan 8-9). Flanagan also quotes Tiago Magalhaes de Luca in stressing the hyperbolic application of long take as key formal component of field of slow cinema (Magalhaes de Luca 21; quoted in Flanagan 9). However, is not included within this classification, despite sharing many of stylistic traits, particularly use of long take. I would argue that this is result of extreme amount of dialogue in Hong's films, combined with generally comic tone majority of his films employ (see Diffrient, Unbearable Lightness for an extended analysis of Hong's use of comedy). As a result, comparison made is usually to Eric Rohmer, a similarly dialogue-centric director of comedies of manners who, despite being part of French New Wave, is often seen as something of a cinematic outlier (this tendency to compare and Rohmer can be seen directly in Grosoli and is also discussed and critiqued by Deutelbaum, Approaching Sang-soo 2-3). …

Use of and beliefs about light cigarettes in four countries: Findings from the International Tobacco Control Policy Evaluation Survey

This study examined reported use of, and beliefs about, so-called light cigarettes among adult smokers in four countries: Australia (Aus), Canada (Can), the United Kingdom (U.K.) and the United States (U.S.). The method used was parallel telephone surveys among 9,046 smokers across the four countries. The results indicated that more than half of all smokers in each country except the U.K. reported smoking light cigarette brands. A majority of smokers surveyed in each country except Canada continue to believe that light cigarettes offer some health benefit compared to regular cigarettes (Canada 43%, U.S. 51%, Australia 55%, U.K. 70%). A majority of smokers in all four countries believed that light cigarettes are smoother on the throat and chest than regular cigarettes. Predictors of use of light cigarettes and beliefs about possible benefits were very similar in the four countries. These results demonstrate an ongoing need for public education about why light cigarettes do not reduce harm and do not make quitting easier. The results provide further evidence for the need for regulatory measures in all four countries to prohibit the use of misleading light and mild descriptors including package imagery in product marketing (as prescribed in Article 11 of the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control), abandon the use of standard FTC/ISO tar and nicotine yields as consumer information, and adopt policies to regulate deceptive design features of cigarettes, such as ventilated filters.

A National Panel for Research Integrity: a proposed blueprint for the prevention and investigation of misconduct in biomedical research*

Biomedical researchers in the UK have made major contributions to disease prevention and patient care through the publication of a large quantity of research evidence in peer-reviewed journals. Isolated (but well publicized) instances of deliberate misconduct (fraud) in clinical research by doctors in the UK have been reported to, and dealt with by, the General Medical Council (GMC) as part of its procedures for professional misconduct [1]. The UK has not yet developed systematic procedures for identification and investigation of suspected deliberate misconduct in biomedical research, unlike other countries such as the US and Denmark [2]. Whilst increasingly publicized and requiring joint attention by the medical profession, and by its colleagues in the biomedical sciences (over whom the GMC has no jurisdiction), such isolated instances of deliberate misconduct probably have little lasting effect on the scientific basis of medical practice [3]. In contrast, it has been suggested that ‘almost certainly far more direct harm to patients results from the inept efforts of poorly trained researchers than ever results from deliberate deception’ [3]. Hence there is a need to address not only deliberate research misconduct, but also to address non-intentional behaviour by researchers which falls short of good ethical and scientific standards. In a recent international survey of biostatisticians, who routinely work closely with physicians and scientists in many branches of medical research and therefore have an unique insight into data, 51% of the 37% who responded knew about fraudulent projects (e.g. fabrication and falsification of data, deceptive reporting of results, suppression of data and deceptive design or analysis) [4]. A recent consensus statement developed at a UK Consensus Conference on Misconduct in Biomedical Research organized by the Royal College of Physicians of Edinburgh defined research misconduct as ‘behaviour by a researcher, intentional or not, that falls short of good ethical and scientific standards’ [2]. It proposed that representatives of both of the Royal Colleges of Physicians of Edinburgh and London, the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Glasgow and their joint Faculty of Pharmaceutical Medicine meet to consider the establishment and remit of a national panel for good research practice. We therefore established our joint working group to address these issues. At a series of meetings we have developed a blueprint for such a panel, which we now publish to inform people of developments and to invite public debate. We have also had discussions with the UK government (Departments of

Control without deception: Individual behaviour in free-riding experiments revisited

Lying to participants offers an experimenter the enticing prospect of making “others' behaviour” a controlled variable, but is eschewed by experimental economists because it may pollute the pool of subjects. This paper proposes and implements a new experimental design, the Conditional Information Lottery, which offers all the benefits of deception without actually deceiving anyone. The design should be suitable for most economics experiments, and works by a modification of an already standard device, the Random Lottery incentive system. The deceptive scenarios of designs which use deceit are replaced with fictitious scenarios, each of which, from a subject's viewpoint, has a chance of being true. The design is implemented in a sequential play public good experiment prompted by Weimann's (1994) result, from a deceptive design, that subjects are more sensitive to freeriding than cooperation on the part of others. The experiment provides similar results to Weimann's, in that subjects are at least as cooperative when uninformed about others' behaviour as they are if reacting to high contributions. No deception is used and the data cohere well both internally and with other public goods experiments. In addition, simultaneous play is found to be more efficient than sequential play, and subjects contribute less at the end of a sequence than at the start. The results suggest pronounced elements of overconfidence, egoism and (biased) reciprocity in behaviour, which may explain decay in contributions in repeated play designs. The experiment shows there is a workable alternative to deception.

Fraud in Medical Research: An International Survey of Biostatisticians

The characteristics of scientific fraud and its impact on medical research are in general not well known. However, the interest in the phenomenon has increased steadily during the last decade. Biostatisticians routinely work closely with physicians and scientists in many branches of medical research and have therefore unique insight into data. In addition, they have methodological competence to detect fraud and could be expected to have a professional interest in valid results. Biostatisticians therefore are likely to provide reliable information on the characteristics of fraud in medical research. The objective of this survey of biostatisticians, who were members of the International Society for Clinical Biostatistics, was to assess the characteristics of fraud in medical research. The survey was performed between April and July 1998. The participation rate was only 37%. We report the results because a majority (51%) of the participants knew about fraudulent projects, and many did not know whether the organization they work for has a formal system for handling suspected fraud or not. Different forms of fraud (e.g., fabrication and falsification of data, deceptive reporting of results, suppression of data, and deceptive design or analysis) had been observed in fairly similar numbers. We conclude that fraud is not a negligible phenomenon in medical research, and that increased awareness of the forms in which it is expressed seems appropriate. Further research, however, is needed to assess the prevalence of different types of fraud, as well as its impact on the validity of results published in the medical literature. Control Clin Trials 2000;21:415–427

Control without deception: Individual behaviour in free-riding experiments revisited

Lying to participants offers an experimenter the enticing prospect of making “others' behaviour” a controlled variable, but is eschewed by experimental economists because it may pollute the pool of subjects. This paper proposes and implements a new experimental design, the Conditional Information Lottery, which offers all the benefits of deception without actually deceiving anyone. The design should be suitable for most economics experiments, and works by a modification of an already standard device, the Random Lottery incentive system. The deceptive scenarios of designs which use deceit are replaced with fictitious scenarios, each of which, from a subject's viewpoint, has a chance of being true. The design is implemented in a sequential play public good experiment prompted by Weimann's (1994) result, from a deceptive design, that subjects are more sensitive to free-riding than cooperation on the part of others. The experiment provides similar results to Weimann's, in that subjects are at least as cooperative when uninformed about others' behaviour as they are if reacting to high contributions. No deception is used and the data cohere well both internally and with other public goods experiments. In addition, simultaneous play is found to be more efficient than sequential play, and subjects contribute less at the end of a sequence than at the start. The results suggest pronounced elements of overconfidence, egoism and (biased) reciprocity in behaviour, which may explain decay in contributions in repeated play designs. The experiment shows there is a workable alternative to deception.