The use of deception in psychological researches is a controversial issue eliciting many debates in which some psychologist argues the benefits of using it such as increasing internal validity and others challenge it because of potential harm and distress it creates in participants. These debates are developed in part as a consequence of the Milgram’s obedience experiment in 20th century, the time the use of deception was commonplace. As reported by Larry Christensen (1984), because the deception was employed in the average of only 15.3 percent from around 1940s to 1960s, Edgar Vinacke criticism about the use of deception had no impact on the process of experiments in 1954. Nonetheless, the percentage did not stay fixed and it started to
…show more content…
Therefore defenders like Smith and Richardson conducted a study which indicated that the not only the use of deception had no harm for participants, but participants in deception experiments enjoyed the study more than the ones in non-deception studies. In regards with Milgram’s experiments, many defenders mentioned that based on subjects’ self-report, only 4 percent of subjects felt discomfort in the study, whereas, critics believed this positive reaction toward the study was due to the fact that the study indeed generated negative feelings of being used in the participants leading them to compensate this bad feeling by saying that the study was worthwhile and interesting. Again, to defend the use of deception in milligram’s study, Berschied (1973) argued that these criticisms are due to the outcome of the Milgram’s study, not the use of deception per se. If the outcome was different in a way that participants did not obey Milgram, no one would challenge his study; therefore these criticisms are referred to the perception of harm due to obedience, not the use of deception (Christensen, 1984). These all indicate the flow of critical and defensive arguments raised after the Milgram’s experiment, making the use of deception a controversial
Therefore defenders like Smith and Richardson conducted a study which indicated that the not only the use of deception had no harm for participants, but participants in deception experiments enjoyed the study more than the ones in non-deception studies. In regards with Milgram’s experiments, many defenders mentioned that based on subjects’ self-report, only 4 percent of subjects felt discomfort in the study, whereas, critics believed this positive reaction toward the study was due to the fact that the study indeed generated negative feelings of being used in the participants leading them to compensate this bad feeling by saying that the study was worthwhile and interesting. Again, to defend the use of deception in milligram’s study, Berschied (1973) argued that these criticisms are due to the outcome of the Milgram’s study, not the use of deception per se. If the outcome was different in a way that participants did not obey Milgram, no one would challenge his study; therefore these criticisms are referred to the perception of harm due to obedience, not the use of deception (Christensen, 1984). These all indicate the flow of critical and defensive arguments raised after the Milgram’s experiment, making the use of deception a controversial