Role Playing : An Alternative to What ? 1

Some of the arguments for the use of role playing as a substitute for traditional experimental methods are examined. The premises on which such arguments are based are found to be more controversial than the technique itself. Role playing as a research tool is not categorically rejected; however, it is argued that its use may be theoretically justified in relation to a certain research problem just like any other method. Finally, the need for theoretical research and for meaningful explication of important social psychological concepts like role has been emphasized. In an earlier analysis (Banuazizi & Movahedi, 1975; Movahedi & Banuazizi, 1975), we criticized the use of role playing for testing hypotheses which concern the impact of certain structural variables on social behavior. We argued that such attempts represent little more than a reification of concepts like status, role, and power and a literal apprehension of the dramaturgical interpretation of social behavior. Although there are human conducts which can be primarily viewed as role behavior, i.e., associated with the individual's status within a social system or a social situation, this concept of role is theoretically different from that used in the role-playing technique. Finally, we maintained that role playing might be regarded as a good strategy for assessing an individual's attitude toward the incumbents of certain social positions, rather than a technique for explaining the critical processes which go on in a real-world situation. The previous analysis was contextually specific, and our arguments were advanced only in reference to testing a certain type of hypotheses. The focus of the ongoing controversy over the use of role playing as a substitute for the traditional experimentation is however somewhat different. Panic over the ethical implications of certain experimental practices, concern over the problem of interpretation of experimental outcomes, and the difficulty of setting up adequate control measures have resulted in a search for alternatives to traditional experimental strategies in social psychology. The question raised is whether role playing can or cannot offer one such alternative. This question has led to an eagerly pursued debate over the viability of role playing as a general research strategy in social psychology. This controversy like many others in the social sciences is fraught with confusion and misunderstandings, and the recent debate in American Psychologist (Forward et al., 1976; Cooper, 1976) has not been particularly fruitful in clarifying a number of crucial points. In this paper, I shall attempt to make some comments on a few of the most recurring arguments that are made in support of the use of role playing as a substitute for traditional experimental methods. My discussion will be strictly limited to the question of justification. Role playing as a strategy for discovering new hypotheses is not of concern in this paper; for such hypotheses, regardless of how they have been discovered, should be subjected to an empirical test. Also, role playing as a pedagogical tool, therapeutic technique, or as an independent variable in a social psychological proposition is not at issue in this analysis. It should be noted at the outset that in the role-playing controversy it