Science vs. Ethics

Milgram's obedience study
1. scientific benefits
  1. Milgram's research has had a lasting impact on psychology
    1. triggered a large number of subsequent studies
    2. the replications refine and enhance our understanding of behaviour
  2. HOWEVER
    1. Mandel (1998) points to a real-life study of a group of German policemen during the Holocaust who behaved quite differently. EG being physically close to their victims didn't make them disobey
      1. Mandel suggests that Milgram provided 'an obedience alibi' and in real life people obey for other reasons
2. ethical costs
  1. psychological harm
  2. lack of right to withdraw
  3. PP's were observed to 'sweat, tremble, stutter, bite their lips, groan and dig their finger nails into their flesh' demonstrates the anxiety they must have been feeling
  4. told that they could leave the experiment at any time, yet being told by the experimenter that 'the experiment requires that you must continue' made leaving very difficult
  5. HOWEVER
    1. Milgram defended himself
      1. he did not know prior to the study, that high levels of distress would be caused
      2. he asked PP's afterwards if they had found the experience distressing and interviewed them again a year later
        84% felt glad to have participated
        74% felt they had learned something of personal importance
      3. findings appeared more shocking because they challenged Western assumptions about freedom and personal responsibility
Zimbardo's prison study
1. scientific benefits
  1. Zimbardo showed that human behaviour could be explained in terms of situational factors (conforming to social roles)
  2. Zimbardo hoped his findings would change the way American prisons are run
  3. HOWEVER
    1. little evidence that the study had any effect of American prisons
      1. suggests that there is little scientific value to the study
2. ethical costs
  1. PP's were fully informed about what was going to take place but nevertheless many of them found the experience more unpleasant than they ever would have imagined
  2. 5 prisoners had to be released early because of extreme depression and the study was stopped after 6 days
  3. HOWEVER
    1. Zimbardo could not have anticipated the distress caused and he did conduct debriefing sessions for years afterwards
      1. however, Savin (1973) believed that 'the ends did not justify the means'
    2. Aronson (1999) points out that humans are actually quite resilient and recover well from such studies and are not permanently harmed
Case study of HM
1. scientific benefits
  1. case studies often used in psychology to provide rich insights into unique circumstances (such as HM)
  2. testing and observation of HM's capabilities over a period of 40 years provided psychologists with important insights into human memory
  3. HOWEVER
    1. same information has been gained from more anonymous studies of patients with amnesia and brain scans of normal individuals performing different memory tasks
2. ethical costs
  1. the big issue concerns informed consent
    1. HM could not remember anything new for more than 90 seconds, so he was unable to give his consent to the prolonged testing he underwent
      1. he did not know what was being done to him or who was doing it; could be seen as an exploitation of a man who had no choice
  2. HOWEVER
    1. HM's parents were alive and may have provided consent
    2. when HM died in 2008, his brain was sliced up into sections and is now kept at the University of California
      1. there was no one who could have given consent

Nächster

Science vs. Ethics

Beschreibung

Zusammenfassung der Ressource

ähnlicher Inhalt

	Erstellt von Hayd23 vor mehr als 11 Jahre