Marcus Carrington

Professor Aisha Sidibe

Eng 21003 Sec A

Research Paper Final

12 December 2018

 

Experiments Testing Ethic Codes

     When it comes to science research there is little to no boundaries on how far one can conduct procedures on patients. The scientists behind these experiments have a hypothesis that they want to prove and are willing to go about anything in order to get a satisfying result.  Throughout history there have been numerous experiments that led to major psychological and medical discoveries that changed the medical and science field however, many of the famous procedures that were undergone are absolutely unethical, violating many social constructs and the rights of the patients. Some of these experiments are the The Milgram Experiment, The Monster Study, and The Stanford Prison experiment. Its without a doubt that these experiments would never be able to take place today and could be totally revised completely in order to get the same results without damaging the patients mentally and physically. Though the experiments may have been accepted and approved at the time of their launch, resulting in major discoveries that have changed the way of thinking and going about medical procedures and research, those behind these non scientific experiments neglected the morals of the patients and the social common ethics pushing the boundaries past their breaking point and because of this, many participants were left with emotional damage causing the methodology of experimentation to change.

     Each and every experiment mentioned was able to provide a better understanding for the thought process of the individual. Though scientists gained the knowledge to determine discrimination and the individuals ability to obey orders of authority figures the procedures consisted of extreme shock therapy manipulation, torment, mental abuse and physical brutal abuse. It was clear that each experiment was obscure and lacked many restrictions on how far the scientist could go. In The Milgram Experiment, Stanley Milgram wanted to further the ideas portrayed during the Holocaust. Milgram figured that people “are generally inclined to obey authority figures”(Danko Meredith, 2013) wondering if the nazi’s were just following the orders of the nazi general or actually were intrigued to torture the jewish. The experiment took place by having actors play the victim/learner, and the test subjects playing the one who takes orders/teacher. The teacher and the lerner were separated in different rooms and the teacher was given instructions to press a button that would shock the learner each time they answered a question incorrectly. As the the learner continued to get the questions wrong, the shock level would increase causing the actor to have complete discomfort and pain. Even though the actor presented the high level of discomfort, the test subject continued to go about the experiment obeying the orders given to them.

     The Milgram experiment is unethical due to the the participants being unaware of the level of voltage that the people were being shocked. If the level of voltage actually existed as what they were labeled to be the learner would have most likely died. The teacher had no desire of stopping the shock therapy continuing on with the orders provided to them. “The subject was given answers such as “the experiment demands that you continue” or “you have no other choice you must to go on”. In some variations, as the transcripts reveal, the “learner” demanded to be let go but was refused and the experiments, with their apparent shocks, went on”(McArthur Dan, 2008). Milgram was willing to allow the patients to shock the learners to their death pushing both the learner and teacher past their breaking point. Today the milgram experiment wouldn’t be allowed for there is now a “respect for human dignity, respect for free and informed consent and a principle of minimising harm”(McArthur Dan, 2008). Milgram’s neglect of the patients is what helped form a fully informed consent form and debriefing of the experiments.

     Furthermore, another unethical experiment similar to the Milgram experiment is the Stanford Prison experiment ran by Zimbardo. The Stanford Prison experiment took place in 1971 and furthered the idea of obedience. 24 healthy physical

and psychological volunteers were split into two groups to recreate a prison setting. The experiment took place by exactly mocking a prison. The guards were told to make sure they have control of the prisoners but to not be violent. When the second day rolled around, the prisoners rebelled and started to ignore the guards. “This behavior shocked the guards and presumably led to the psychological abuse that followed. The guards started separating “good” and “bad” prisoners, and doled out punishments including push ups, solitary confinement, and public humiliation to rebellious prisoners”(Danko Meredith, 2013). The guards started to take the role of their positions extremely seriously torturing the prisoners. They had become sadistic and the whole experiment had gone chaotic leaving the prisons to feel depressed and even having some of them to drop out from the experiment.

     Zimbardo’s experiment went against the social norms of reasonability. The entire experiment was “stark and claustrophobic, much like the makeshift ‘prison’ that was built”(Maher Brendan, 2015). The experiment followed how certain situations and stress could bring out evil behaviours and how authority can be abused. Zimbardo allowed the guards to torture the prisoners with real life tactics all for the means of science research. Those that took the role of the

prisoners had dealt with pain and suffering only to be broken and have trauma for the rest of their life. Zimbardo knew from the beginning that the outcome of his experiment was going to have a negative effect on the prisoners. His hypothesis consisted on investigating “human behavior being affected by roles, rules, symbols and uniforms rather than personality and behavior traits”(Ramji Rubina, 2015). Straightforward the experiment was a reg flag and shouldn’t have been conducted especially for the fact that it was building off of the Milgram experiment which had already been deemed as unethical.

     A common theme in unethical studies is the division of two groups and the neglect of a certain group while the other is praised. The Monster Study was another major experiment that had impacted science research. Wendell Johnson, a reputable psychologist known to complete unethical experiments wondered what caused people to stutter. Johnson took a group of 22 orphanage students and split them into two groups labeling one as the normal speakers and the other as stutterers. The kids in the normal speakers group were constantly praised and awarded for their speech and made aware of in front of the stutter group. The kids within the stuttering group had their self esteem lowered for constantly being yelled at for talking a certain way. “The non stutterers received praise for their normal speech patterns, while the stuttering group received negative reinforcement. They were constantly put on edge through reminders to avoid stuttering”(Clark Josh, 2009). As a result the kids within the stuttering group had either worsened their stutters or fully developed a stutter after never having one before.

     The Monster Study is absolutely unethical because it involves the tearing down of the adolescents self esteem. It forced a group of kids to develop a stutter that would impact them for the rest of their life. Not only did it physically bring down the kids, “The children were never told they had been involved in a study, until it was revealed by a newspaper over 60 years later and the administrators of the orphanage were also misled about the purpose of the study. This deception was never explained to them”(The Monster Study on Stuttering, PsyBlog). With this being said, because the kids and the administrators were misled and deceived about the experiment, it shows that the experiment was unethical and most definitely wouldn’t be able to take place today. Not only were the patients not informed, the public was never informed either. The whole study was to bring awareness to the topic of stuttering and to find the case however, it was never published proving that the kids were now damaged with a verbal stutter for no reason. As an alternative Wendell Johnson could have investigated the surroundings of the kids orphanage observing the speech patterns within the home instead of bringing down their self esteem.

     Even though all three experiments are clearly unethical and had many negative effects on the participants after completion, some scientist may believe that the experiments should only be looked at by furthering the field of psychology and not its procedures. The scientist believe that  the greatest outcome of all the experiments conducted is the idea that the impact of an authority figure giving orders to someone underneath their social class is what should be taken away. Even though this has been proven by the experiments, this hypothesis could of simple been observed by visiting an actual prison, or studying many leaders and how their followers reacted to their rule order. These experiments have had the impact that they had on society due to its unethical procedures. It’s hard to avoid the idea of people almost getting shocked to their death and undergoing constant torment and to pay attention to a proven hypothesis that could of been examined in a different way. Moreover, the procedures of the experiments weren’t  science based nor accurate because of the participants involved and the experiments go about.

     When observing previous famous science experiments it’s clear that many of the scientist neglected common ethics and were only focused on proving a hypothesis. Each and every experiment went against the participants morals leaving a long lasting mental effect on them. It is clear that scientist are willing to almost kill a test patient all for the means of science research. Though these experiments took place in the last century, the methods that were gone about would never be able to exist and be conducted today.

 

Works Cited

 

Clark, Josh. “Horrific U.S. Medical Experiments Come to Light.” PsycEXTRA , 19 May 2009, doi:10.1037/e669842011-002.

Danko, Meredith. “10 Psychological Experiments That Could Never Happen Today.” Mental Floss, 20 Sept. 2013, mentalfloss.com/article/52787/10-famous-psychological-experiments-could-never-happen-today.

Maher, Brendan. “The anatomy of obedience: Brendan Maher reviews two films probing notorious US psychological experiments.” Nature, vol. 523, no. 7561, 2015, p. 408+. Health Reference Center Academic, http://link.galegroup.com/apps/doc/A423049274/HRCA?u=cuny_ccny&sid=HRCA&xid=07f1ab6b.

McArthur, D. Sci Eng Ethics (2009) 15: 69. https://doi-org.ccny-proxy1.libr.ccny.cuny.edu/10.1007/s11948-008-9083-4

McLeod, Saul A. Zimbardo – Stanford prison experiment (2018, Sept 16)

Ramji, Rubina. “The Stanford Prison Experiment.” Journal of Religion and Film, vol. 19, no. 1, 2015. Academic OneFile, http://link.galegroup.com/apps/doc/A419929476/AONE?u=cuny_ccny&sid=AONE&xid=5c597ae0.

Tayag, Yasmin. “Six Immoral Studies That Led To Breakthroughs.” Inverse.com, 13 July 2015

“The ‘Monster Study’ on Stuttering.” PsyBlog, www.spring.org.uk/2007/06/monster-study.php.

 

Marcus Carrington

Professor Aisha Sidibe

Eng 21003 Sec A

Research Paper Draft

30 November 2018

 

Experiments Testing Ethic Codes

     When it comes to science research there is little to no boundaries on how far one can conduct procedures on patients. The scientists behind these experiments have a hypothesis that they want to prove and are willing to go about anything in order to get a satisfying result.  Throughout history there have been numerous experiments that led to major psychological and medical discoveries that changed the medical and science field however, many of the famous procedures that were undergone are absolutely unethical, violating many social constructs and the rights of the patients. Some of these experiments are the The Milgram Experiment, The Monster Study, and The Stanford Prison experiment. Its without a doubt that these experiments would never be able to take place today and could be totally revised completely in order to get the same results without damaging the patients mentally and physically. Though the experiments may have been accepted and approved at the time of their launch, resulting in major discoveries that have changed the way of thinking and going about medical procedures and research, those behind the experiments neglected the morals of the patients and the social common ethics pushing the boundaries past their breaking point.

     Each and every experiment mentioned was able to provide a better understanding for the thought process of the individual. Though scientists gained the knowledge to determine discrimination and the individuals ability to obey orders of authority figures the procedures consisted of extreme shock therapy, torment, and brutal abuse. It was clear that each experiment was obscure and lacked many restrictions on how far the scientist could go. In The Milgram Experiment, Stanley Milgram wanted to further the ideas portrayed during the Holocaust. Milgram figured that people “are generally inclined to obey authority figures”(Danko Meredith, 2013) wondering if the nazi’s were just following the orders of the nazi general or actually were intrigued to torture the jewish. The experiment took place by having actors play the victim/learner, and the test subjects playing the one who takes orders/teacher. The teacher and the lerner were separated in different rooms and the teacher was given instructions to press a button that would shock the learner each time they answered a question incorrectly. As the the learner continued to get the questions wrong, the shock level would increase causing the actor to have complete discomfort and pain. Even though the actor presented the high level of discomfort, the test subject continued to go about the experiment obeying the orders given to them.

     The Milgram experiment is unethical due to the the participants being unaware of the level of voltage that the people were being shocked. If the level of voltage actually existed as what they were labeled to be the learner would have most likely died. The teacher had no desire of stopping the shock therapy continuing on with the orders provided to them. “The subject was given answers such as “the experiment demands that you continue” or “you have no other choice you must to go on”. In some variations, as the transcripts reveal, the “learner” demanded to be let go but was refused and the experiments, with their apparent shocks, went on”(McArthur Dan, 2008). Milgram was willing to allow the patients to shock the learners to their death pushing both the learner and teacher past their breaking point. Today the milgram experiment wouldn’t be allowed for there is now a “respect for human dignity, respect for free and informed consent and a principle of minimising harm”(McArthur Dan, 2008). Milgram’s neglect of the patients is what helped form a fully informed consent form and debriefing of the experiments.

     Furthermore, another unethical experiment similar to the Milgram experiment is the Stanford Prison experiment ran by Zimbardo. The Stanford Prison experiment took place in 1971 and furthered the idea of obedience. 24 healthy physical and psychological volunteers were split into two groups to recreate a prison setting. The experiment took place by exactly mocking a prison. The guards were told to make sure they have control of the prisoners but to not be violent. When the second day rolled around, the prisoners rebelled and started to ignore the guards. “This behavior shocked the guards and presumably led to the psychological abuse that followed. The guards started separating “good” and “bad” prisoners, and doled out punishments including push ups, solitary confinement, and public humiliation to rebellious prisoners”(Danko Meredith, 2013). The guards started to take the role of their positions extremely seriously torturing the prisoners. They had become sadistic and the whole experiment had gone chaotic leaving the prisons to feel depressed and even having some of them to drop out from the experiment.

     Zimbardo’s experiment went against the social norms of reasonability. The entire experiment was stark and claustrophobic, much like the makeshift ‘prison’ that was built”(Maher Brendan, 2015). The experiment followed how certain situations and stress could bring out evil behaviours and how authority can be abused. Zimbardo allowed the guards to torture the prisoners with real life tactics all for the means of science research. Those that took the role of the prisoners had dealt with pain and suffering only to be broken and scared for the rest of their life. Zimbardo knew from the beginning that the outcome of his experiment was going to have a negative effect on the prisoners. His hypothesis consisted on investigating “human behavior being affected by roles, rules, symbols and uniforms rather than personality and behavior traits”(Ramji Rubina, 2015). Straightforward the experiment was a reg flag and shouldn’t have been conducted especially for the fact that it was building off of the Milgram experiment which had already been deemed as unethical.

     A common theme in unethical studies is the division of two groups and the neglect of a certain group while the other is praised. The Monster Study was another major experiment that had impacted science research. Wendell Johnson, a reputable psychologist known to complete unethical experiments wondered what caused people to stutter. Johnson took a group of 22 orphanage students and split them into two groups labeling one as the normal speakers and the other as stutterers. The kids in the normal speakers group were constantly praised and awarded for their speech and made aware of in front of the stutter group. The kids within the stuttering group had their self esteem lowered for constantly being yelled at for talking a certain way. “The non stutterers received praise for their normal speech patterns, while the stuttering group received negative reinforcement. They were constantly put on edge through reminders to avoid stuttering”(Clark Josh, 2009). As a result the kids within the stuttering group had either worsened their stutters or fully developed a stutter after never having one before.

      The Monster Study is absolutely unethical because it involves the tearing down of the adolescents self esteem. It forced a group of kids to develop a stutter that would impact them for the rest of their life. Not only did it physically bring down the kids, “The children were never told they had been involved in a study, until it was revealed by a newspaper over 60 years later and the administrators of the orphanage were also misled about the purpose of the study. This deception was never explained to them”(The Monster Study on Stuttering, PsyBlog). With this being said, because the kids and the administrators were misled and deceived about the experiment, it shows that the experiment was unethical and most definitely wouldn’t be able to take place today. Not only were the patients not informed the public was never informed either. The whole study was to bring awareness to the topic of stuttering and to find the case however, it was never published proving that the kids were now damaged for no reason. As an alternative Wendell Johnson could have investigated the surroundings of the kids orphanage observing the speech patterns within the home.

     Even though all three experiments are clearly unethical and had many negative effects on the participants after completion, some scientist may believe that the experiments should only be looked at by furthering the field of psychology and not its procedures. The scientist believe that  the greatest outcome of all the experiments conducted is the idea that the impact of an authority figure giving orders to someone underneath their social class is what should be taken away. Even though this has been proven by the experiments, this hypothesis could of simple been observed by visiting an actual prison, or studying many leaders and how their followers reacted to their rule order. These experiments have had the impact that they had on society due to its unethical procedures. It’s hard to avoid the idea of people almost getting shocked to their death and undergoing constant torment and to pay attention to a proven hypothesis that could of been examined in a different way.

      When observing previous famous science experiments it’s clear that many of the scientist neglected common ethics and were only focused on proving a hypothesis. Each and every experiment went against the participants morals leaving a long lasting mental effect on them. It is clear that scientist are willing to almost kill a test patient all for the means of science research. Though these experiments took place in the last century, the methods that were gone about would never be able to exist and be conducted today.