Ethics might not have been the main concern during the era of pioneer psychology, as many psychologist conducted controversial experiments such as “little Albert”(1920) or the “Stanford Prison Experiment”(1972). However, as years passed, these unethical researches conducted in the early years has be used to influence the progress of psychological research.
When conducting an experiment or research, ethics must surely be taken into consideration. The most important things are an informed consent form, participation should be voluntary, the participants will be allowed to withdraw from the research at any given time and their details are anonymous. However, many psychologist, till this day, fail to use ethics in it’s proper manner.
An example …show more content…
There was an informed consent, the participants came voluntarily and were informed that they could withdraw from the experiment at any given time, however, the original hypothesis and reason for experiment was not told to the participants. Milgram sat his 40 participants in a laboratory setting, with actors in another room and the participants, who were all male. The participants were initially told that the experiment was about the effects of punishment on memory, the psychologist instructed the participants to administer an amount of voltage shock to the person in the next room if they had not remembered the sequenced they were supposed to. The actor would incorrectly say the sequence and the participant would have to administer the shock, each incorrect answer would make the participant administer a higher voltage. Even though the actor was not administered any voltage and some of the participants wanted to leave, Baumrind (1964) criticized his work by stating that the participants did not leave as they were under pressure by the examiner, as they would say when the participant was too reluctant or failed to continue, “It is absolutely essential that you continue” (Milgram, 1963, p. 374). Milgram commented on this, by saying he had fully briefed the participants once the research was done, and after the experiment, most of the people who partook, were glad that they had participated as …show more content…
The experimenters payed the mother of the child $1 and conducted the experiment in the hospital the mother worked in. Using classical condition, the experimenters would introduce a rat to little Albert followed by a loud sound, which would scare the child. They carried on this procedure until the child was afraid of the rat even without the loud sounds, this continued with with introducing the child to a dog and rabbit, which resulted in similar circumstances, the child would cry and crawl away from the conditioned stimuli. Watson and Rayner claimed they wanted to uncondition the child after the 5th session but could not since the child was removed from the hospital. There were ethical guidelines that were carried out during this experiment, such as Little Alberts name was anonymous, however in later years researches found his real name to be Douglas Merritte. The mistakes however, were much more than those guidelines they managed to fulfill, firstly, there was no informed consent, the experimenters did not brief the mother of what they were about to do to their child which could potentially harm him, if they had not avoided such a crucial step in research, perhaps they would have been able to uncondition little Albert. Secondly, participants wellbeing both physically and mentally were damaged, as little Albert was so afraid of the furry objects that he would
When conducting an experiment or research, ethics must surely be taken into consideration. The most important things are an informed consent form, participation should be voluntary, the participants will be allowed to withdraw from the research at any given time and their details are anonymous. However, many psychologist, till this day, fail to use ethics in it’s proper manner.
An example …show more content…
There was an informed consent, the participants came voluntarily and were informed that they could withdraw from the experiment at any given time, however, the original hypothesis and reason for experiment was not told to the participants. Milgram sat his 40 participants in a laboratory setting, with actors in another room and the participants, who were all male. The participants were initially told that the experiment was about the effects of punishment on memory, the psychologist instructed the participants to administer an amount of voltage shock to the person in the next room if they had not remembered the sequenced they were supposed to. The actor would incorrectly say the sequence and the participant would have to administer the shock, each incorrect answer would make the participant administer a higher voltage. Even though the actor was not administered any voltage and some of the participants wanted to leave, Baumrind (1964) criticized his work by stating that the participants did not leave as they were under pressure by the examiner, as they would say when the participant was too reluctant or failed to continue, “It is absolutely essential that you continue” (Milgram, 1963, p. 374). Milgram commented on this, by saying he had fully briefed the participants once the research was done, and after the experiment, most of the people who partook, were glad that they had participated as …show more content…
The experimenters payed the mother of the child $1 and conducted the experiment in the hospital the mother worked in. Using classical condition, the experimenters would introduce a rat to little Albert followed by a loud sound, which would scare the child. They carried on this procedure until the child was afraid of the rat even without the loud sounds, this continued with with introducing the child to a dog and rabbit, which resulted in similar circumstances, the child would cry and crawl away from the conditioned stimuli. Watson and Rayner claimed they wanted to uncondition the child after the 5th session but could not since the child was removed from the hospital. There were ethical guidelines that were carried out during this experiment, such as Little Alberts name was anonymous, however in later years researches found his real name to be Douglas Merritte. The mistakes however, were much more than those guidelines they managed to fulfill, firstly, there was no informed consent, the experimenters did not brief the mother of what they were about to do to their child which could potentially harm him, if they had not avoided such a crucial step in research, perhaps they would have been able to uncondition little Albert. Secondly, participants wellbeing both physically and mentally were damaged, as little Albert was so afraid of the furry objects that he would