We are interested in examining whether a set of responsibility functions, which was initially motivated normatively rather than descriptively, can serve to explain actual behaviour in a decision situation. Correspondingly, we explore whether the results of applying these functions to actual decision scenarios can tell us anything about the described functions. We present the definition of the responsibility functions together with some aspects of the normative reasoning that motivated them, before discussing a number of experimental setups suitable for this investigation and selecting one with which to continue. We compute the respective responsibility ascriptions and compare the expected effects of these with the actual change in behaviour. What is observed in the experimental setup matches in some aspects with the expectation, while in other aspects a refinement of the responsibility representation would be needed for it to be descriptively accurate.