Suspicion probes are the traditional tool employed to assess the extent to which participants suspect intentional misdirection or deception within the research context. A primary reason psychologists use deception in research settings is to prevent participants from altering their behavior in light of knowing what is being studied, which could undermine internal validity as well as threaten the generalizability of findings to the real world (i.e., external validity). The present article elucidates a number of challenges with suspicion probes. A definition and framework for conceptualizing the construct of suspicion in research settings are proposed. Following a literature review, an analysis of existing evidence, and new data on the prevalence of using and reporting suspicion probes, we conclude that suspicion is a likely problem in research practice. We provide a decision guide to help researchers navigate the numerous choices involved in addressing potential suspicion and call for a combination of (a) renewed research leading to empirically supported tools and best practices and (b) systemic changes to editorial policies, funding practices, professional standards, and research training that would increase rigor and focus on this aspect of research methodology.

中文翻译：

---

关于可疑探测器的怀疑：前进的道路。

怀疑调查是用于评估参与者怀疑研究背景下故意误导或欺骗程度的传统工具。心理学家在研究环境中使用欺骗的主要原因是防止参与者根据了解正在研究的内容改变自己的行为，这可能会破坏内部有效性并威胁到研究结果对现实世界的普遍性（即外部有效性）。本文阐明了嫌疑调查的一些挑战。提出了在研究环境中概念化怀疑结构的定义和框架。经过文献综述、对现有证据的分析以及关于使用和报告可疑探针的流行程度的新数据，我们得出结论，怀疑是研究实践中可能存在的问题。我们提供决策指南，帮助研究人员应对解决潜在怀疑所涉及的众多选择，并呼吁将以下方面结合起来：(a) 重新研究，得出经验支持的工具和最佳实践；(b) 对编辑政策、资助实践、专业知识进行系统性改变。标准和研究培训，以提高严谨性并重点关注研究方法的这一方面。