Studies of sociocultural level of analysis study how the implied, actual, or imagined presence of others affect one's behavior, thoughts, and feelings in different situations. In psychology, ethics must be considered to make sure that the participants are not harmed in any way and that the conducted research is ethically valid. I have chosen to discuss the ethical considerations related to research studies at the sociocultural level of analysis about Milgram's obedience study (1963) and Zimbardo's Stanford Prison Experiment (1973). They are both famous for their lack of ethical considerations, and I am going to discuss how and why they are lacking the ethical considerations.
Let's start discussing the Stanford Prison Experiment conducted …show more content…
The participants had the right to leave the experiment at any time (although they were encouraged not to), so considering this the experiment was maybe not as unethical as it may seem.
The second study I am going to discuss is Stanley Milgram's experiment about obedience (1963). Milgram conducted the study after a trial of a German man, Adolf Eichmann, who had been one of the major organizers of the holocaust. Milgram wanted to argue that maybe Eichmann was just following orders and even though he might not have been a bad person, he made bad decisions because of the power the authorities had on him.
In the experiment Milgram used 40 men in ages between 20 to 50, and they got paid $4.50 for just turning up. The experiment started with Milgram letting two participants choose a piece of paper. One of the pieces of papers would say learner and one teacher, or at least that's what the participant thought. What the participant did not know was that the other participant was a confederate, and knew the real aim of the study. So the real participants would always get a piece of paper that said teacher. Here we can already see a form of deception, but it can be argued against since the participants would have been biased if they knew the real aim of the study. The teachers …show more content…
Even though the learner gave wrong answers on purpose, the teacher would give them electric shocks and it would continue as normal. When the shocks reached to 300 volts the learner started banging the wall and refused to answer the next questions. This is when the teachers started to refuse to give the electric shocks. The "experimenter" had been given lines that they should say in a situation like that, and the experimenter basically told the participants that it is essential that they have to continue, and they can not leave. Withdrawal was something that Milgram should have had some ethical considerations about, because even though the participants showed strong desire to leave the experiment, the "experimenter" encouraged them to continue. Another ethical issue that should have been considered by Milgram was participant protection, because even though the participants showed signs of extreme tension and distress, such as shaking and sweating, Milgram chose to continue the study. What can be found quite shocking is that 65% of the participants chose to continue until 450 volts, which was the highest voltage
Let's start discussing the Stanford Prison Experiment conducted …show more content…
The participants had the right to leave the experiment at any time (although they were encouraged not to), so considering this the experiment was maybe not as unethical as it may seem.
The second study I am going to discuss is Stanley Milgram's experiment about obedience (1963). Milgram conducted the study after a trial of a German man, Adolf Eichmann, who had been one of the major organizers of the holocaust. Milgram wanted to argue that maybe Eichmann was just following orders and even though he might not have been a bad person, he made bad decisions because of the power the authorities had on him.
In the experiment Milgram used 40 men in ages between 20 to 50, and they got paid $4.50 for just turning up. The experiment started with Milgram letting two participants choose a piece of paper. One of the pieces of papers would say learner and one teacher, or at least that's what the participant thought. What the participant did not know was that the other participant was a confederate, and knew the real aim of the study. So the real participants would always get a piece of paper that said teacher. Here we can already see a form of deception, but it can be argued against since the participants would have been biased if they knew the real aim of the study. The teachers …show more content…
Even though the learner gave wrong answers on purpose, the teacher would give them electric shocks and it would continue as normal. When the shocks reached to 300 volts the learner started banging the wall and refused to answer the next questions. This is when the teachers started to refuse to give the electric shocks. The "experimenter" had been given lines that they should say in a situation like that, and the experimenter basically told the participants that it is essential that they have to continue, and they can not leave. Withdrawal was something that Milgram should have had some ethical considerations about, because even though the participants showed strong desire to leave the experiment, the "experimenter" encouraged them to continue. Another ethical issue that should have been considered by Milgram was participant protection, because even though the participants showed signs of extreme tension and distress, such as shaking and sweating, Milgram chose to continue the study. What can be found quite shocking is that 65% of the participants chose to continue until 450 volts, which was the highest voltage