Milgram and Stanford Experiment
During the Milgram and Stanford experiment, each person had a special role. When given a role, people try their best to fulfill their duties no matter what is required of them. These experiments aim to understand how far someone will go to obey their superiors and follow instructions. You were either a prisoner, guard, teacher, or a learner. Each and every one of these participants were influenced into having demand characteristics.
As I was being brought up, of course it was necessary to follow the rules. You can’t be disobedient and expect to get anywhere in life. Life is all about making choices and you have the choice to determine if you want to follow the rules or not. But, I feel like this is not always …show more content…
They actually believed they were shocking the learners for not knowing the right answer. To me, I feel like the participants were being made a fool out of. What if they were actually hurting those people by going up in volts? They were so pressed on following orders, they didn’t care they could hurt or even kill a human being. Another issue that was unethical was the urge for the participants to continue. Even though they had the right to withdraw, it wasn’t made clear. They were told to please continue, it’s required, absolutely essential, and they have no other choice. It is basically discouraging the person from doing it.
Although the people were discouraged in the Milgram experiment, it didn’t go much different in the Stanford experiment. I believe they experience more unethical issues than Milgram’s. The prisoners wasn’t protected from psychological harm. If it’s just an experiment, why should people become emotionally distressed and humiliated? One prisoner had to be released after one day because of a mental breakdown. Also, Zimbardo wasn’t aware of other things that was going on. He didn’t know the prisoners was going to be arrested at their homes. This was a breach of his
During the Milgram and Stanford experiment, each person had a special role. When given a role, people try their best to fulfill their duties no matter what is required of them. These experiments aim to understand how far someone will go to obey their superiors and follow instructions. You were either a prisoner, guard, teacher, or a learner. Each and every one of these participants were influenced into having demand characteristics.
As I was being brought up, of course it was necessary to follow the rules. You can’t be disobedient and expect to get anywhere in life. Life is all about making choices and you have the choice to determine if you want to follow the rules or not. But, I feel like this is not always …show more content…
They actually believed they were shocking the learners for not knowing the right answer. To me, I feel like the participants were being made a fool out of. What if they were actually hurting those people by going up in volts? They were so pressed on following orders, they didn’t care they could hurt or even kill a human being. Another issue that was unethical was the urge for the participants to continue. Even though they had the right to withdraw, it wasn’t made clear. They were told to please continue, it’s required, absolutely essential, and they have no other choice. It is basically discouraging the person from doing it.
Although the people were discouraged in the Milgram experiment, it didn’t go much different in the Stanford experiment. I believe they experience more unethical issues than Milgram’s. The prisoners wasn’t protected from psychological harm. If it’s just an experiment, why should people become emotionally distressed and humiliated? One prisoner had to be released after one day because of a mental breakdown. Also, Zimbardo wasn’t aware of other things that was going on. He didn’t know the prisoners was going to be arrested at their homes. This was a breach of his