Score contribution per author:
α: calibrated so average coauthorship-adjusted count equals average raw count
I report the results of a large survey of experimental subjects and researchers concerning the use of deception. While both groups are highly heterogeneous in their evaluation of various design techniques, they tend to order them in a rather similar way. While the attitude towards deception among subjects tends to be more favorable than among researchers, even the latter do not readily conform with the common view that deception is never accepted in experimental economics. I propose a working definition and typology of deceptive techniques and find that they correctly organize the survey data. I conclude with some policy recommendations.