Psy/315 Week 3

560 Words2 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Essays about ethics in research

1) Course of Action A: Researchers should not use the data from either the Milgram or Zimbardo Experiment

Course of Action B: Researchers should use the data from either the Milgram or Zimbardo Experiment

2) The reasons supporting the first course of action, “researchers should not use the data from either the Milgram or Zimbardo Experiment”, reflects the views that the experiments conducted created unjustifiable harm, causing psychological trauma, physical abuse, emotional harm, and unethical methods of conducting an experiment. The second course of action “researchers should use the data from either the Milgram or Zimbardo Experiment”, supported the research’s findings on how far a relatively “good” individual will carry out a harmful or bad action under the position of authority. This not only gives us a deeper understanding of how the holocaust may have occurred, but the role authority plays on obedience. …show more content…

The ethical reasons supporting course of action B, “researchers should use the data”, are beneficence, autonomy and fidelity.

4) The reasons for not supporting the course of action A “researchers should not use the data”, include the loss of knowledge and understanding the role authority plays in obedience, and the reason why a relatively “good” individual will carry out a harmful or bad action under the position of authority. The reasons for not supporting the course of action B “researchers should use the data” is the unjustifiable harm, causing psychological trauma, physical abuse, emotional harm, and unethical methods of conducting an experiment.

5) Ethical principles that would be compromised if action A was taken are, beneficence, autonomy and fidelity. Ethical principles that would be compromised if action B was taken are, beneficence, nonmaleficence, autonomy, and

Show More
Related

  • Analysis Of Stanley Milgram's The Perils Of Obedience

    729 Words  | 2 Pages

    As Whitbourne states, "if participants want to discontinue their involvement in the study, they must be allowed to do so without any penalty or question" (Whitbourne). Milgram claims that all of the subjects were permitted to leave at any time; however, the experimenter displays an acknowledgeable amount of persistence towards the subject in continuing the experiment, insisting that “it’s absolutely essential” that they continue and that they “have no choice” but to stay in the experiment (Milgram 80-81). Baumrind insists that Milgram’s experimental design was degrading and emotionally harming to its subjects (Baumrind 92-93). Peter C. Baker, author of “Electric Schlock: Did Stanley Milgram 's Famous Obedience Experiments Prove Anything?,” claims that most humans tend to obey when they hear commands from an authority figure (Baker). Due to the fact that every subject in Milgram’s experiment volunteered to particpate, it can be assumed that the majority of the subjects held trust for their experimenter, who, in Milgram’s experiment, is the authority figure (Baumrind 93). As Baumrind mentions, Milgram’s experiment had the potential of causing participants of the experiment to have distrust toward other adult authorities in the future after realizing that they had been deceived and practically denied of their right to discontinue their participation in the study

    Read More

  • Henrietta Lacks Ethics

    2327 Words  | 5 Pages

    Those who were affected by the testing in hospitals, prisons, and mental health institutions were the patients/inmates as well as their families, Henrietta Lacks, the doctors performing the research and procedures, the actual institutions in which research was being held, and the human/health sciences field as a whole. Many ethical principles can be applied to these dilemmas: Reliance on Scientific Knowledge (1.01), Boundaries of Competence (1.02), Integrity (1.04), Professional and Scientific Relationships (1.05), Exploitative Relationships (1.07, a), Responsibility (2.02), Rights and Prerogatives of Clients (2.05), Maintaining Confidentiality (2.06), Maintaining Records (2.07), Disclosures (2.08), Treatment/Intervention Efficacy (2.09), Involving Clients in Planning and Consent (4.02), Promoting an Ethical Culture (7.01), Ethical Violations by Others and Risk of Harm (7.02), Avoiding False or Deceptive Statements (8.01), Conforming with Laws and Regulations (9.01), Characteristics of Responsible Research (9.02), Informed Consent (9.03), and Using Confidential Information for Didactic or Instructive Purposes (9.04), and Debriefing (9.05). These particular dilemmas were not really handled until much later when laws were passed that regulated the way human subjects could be used for research. Patients

    Read More

  • Analyzing Stanley Milgram's Obedience Experiment

    1077 Words  | 3 Pages

    According to Wes Bertrand, author of "Abstract", states that "the degree of self- responsibility practiced by a person drastically affects his or her level of obedience to unjust commands" (Bertrand). Milgram related his experiment with Hitler 's Germany by relating that "the man in the camp who actually dropped Cyclon-b into gas chambers was able to justify his behavior on the ground that he was only following orders from above" (Milgram 89). Baumrind supports his statement coming from one point of view; she argues that because Hitler made the Jews sound subhuman and not worth the extra effort, a subordinate officer slaughtering the Jews has no need to feel guilt because he was acting right within his frame of reference" (Baumrind 93). In agreement with Baumrind claiming the Jews were made subhuman, the article "German Jews during the Holocaust, 1939–1945" explains how they took their belongings claiming to use them to produce weapons for the war, the level of obedience and officers acting as they were ordered to by their superiors was necessary or tragedy might strike them as well.If what Diana Baumrind says is true, she is supporting Milgram by saying that the officer was acting right because he was told so, rather than disputing him; like the experiment when the experiment when the experimenter asked the teacher to continue with the

    Read More

  • Why Do Marines Obey Orders In A Few Good Men

    958 Words  | 2 Pages

    During the Stanley Milgram Experiment, many subjects were uncomfortable doing the shock, all 40 subjects obeyed up to 300 volts. If the subject asked who was responsible if anything happen to the learner, the experimenter answered “I am responsible”. This gave the subjects a relief and many continued, and making it more authoritarian for each time the subject contacted the experimenter. Zimbardo, on the other hand, believes that social and ideological factors determined how both guards and prisoners behaved, with individuals acting in a way that they thought was required, rather than using their own

    Read More

  • The Process of Research: The Institutional Review Board

    1524 Words  | 4 Pages

    During the process of research, professionals collect data or identifiable private information through intervention or interaction. While this is a vital part of the scientific and medical fields, every precaution must be taken by researchers to protect the participants' rights. Ethics, outlined by the Belmont report; requirements, described by the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS); and regulations, laid out by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) are verified by an Institutional Review Board (IRB). This procedure assures that all human rights are safeguarded during the entire research process.

    Read More

  • The Milgram Experiment: The Stanford Prison Experiment

    2182 Words  | 5 Pages

    One of the most famous studies in psychology was carried out by Stanley Milgram (1963), a psychologist at Yale University, conducted an experiment focusing on the conflict between obedience to authority and personal conscience. Milgram started his experiments in 1961, shortly after the trial of the World War II criminal Adolph Eichmann had begun. Eichmann’s defense that he was merely following instructions when he ordered the deaths of millions of Jews roused Milgram’s interest. Milgram posed the question, "Could it be that Eichmann and his million accomplices in the Holocaust were just following orders? Could we call them all accomplices?"

    Read More

  • Summary Of Opening Skinner's Box By Lauren Slater

    618 Words  | 2 Pages

    In Lauren Slater’s book Opening Skinner’s Box, the second chapter “Obscura” discusses Stanley Milgram, one of the most influential social psychologists. Milgram created an experiment which would show just how far one would go when obeying instructions from an authoritative figure, even if it meant harming another person while doing so. The purpose of this experiment was to find justifications for what the Nazi’s did during the Holocaust. However, the experiment showed much more than the sociological reasoning behind the acts of genocide. It showed just how much we humans are capable of.

    Read More

  • The Milgram Experiment of The 1960s

    1238 Words  | 3 Pages

    The Milgram experiment was designed and performed by Yale University social psychologist Stanley Milgram in 1961. Milgram created this experiment predominately to determine what would have motivated Germans to so readily conform to the demands put forth by the Nazi party. Milgram wished to answer his question, “Could it be that Eichmann and his million accomplices in the Holocaust were just following orders? Could we call them all accomplices?” (McLeod). At the time of these experiments, debates about the Nuremberg trials, particularly the trial of Adolf Eichmann, one of the major perpetrators in the Holocaust, were still ongoing. At these trials, many Nazi party officials and military officers were put on trial for committing “crimes against humanity.” Although some defendants pleaded guilty, others claimed that they were innocent and only following orders that were given to them by a higher authority, Adolf Hitler. In the end, twelve of the defendants were sentenced to death, three to life in prison, four to approximately fifteen year prison terms, and three were acquitted (“The Nuremberg Trials”)....

    Read More

  • Quasi-experimental Design

    2375 Words  | 5 Pages

    2. The researcher does not want or need to generalize the results to a population.

    Read More

  • The Effect of Social Loafing on Participants in Collective and Coactive Conditions

    1866 Words  | 4 Pages

    ...s strength in the experiment rather than a limitation which future studies should also monitor.

    Read More

  • Analysis of Initiatives of Healthcare Reform

    3072 Words  | 7 Pages

    Myers, J., Frieden, T., Bherwani, K., & Henning, K. (2008). Ethics in public health research. American Journal of Public Health, 98(5), 793-801.

    Read More

  • Animal Testing: A Moral Dilemma

    1011 Words  | 3 Pages

    “To be opposed to what is going on now it is not necessary to insist that all animal experiments stop immediately. All we need to say is that experiments serving no direct and urgent purpose should stop immediately, and in the remaining fields of research, we should, whenever possible, seek to replace experiments that involve animals with alternative methods that do not.”

    Read More

  • Analysis Of Stanley Milgram's Behavioral Study Of Obedience

    1241 Words  | 3 Pages

    It is human nature to respect and obey elders or authoritative figures, even when it may result in harm to oneself or others. Stanley Milgram, an American social psychologist, conducted an experiment to test the reasoning behind a person’s obedience. He uses this experiment in hope to gain a better understanding behind the reason Hitler was so successful in manipulating the Germans along with why their obedience continued on such extreme levels. Milgram conducts a strategy similar to Hitler’s in attempt to test ones obedience. Diana Baumrind, a clinical and developmental psychologist, disagreed with Milgram’s experiment in her article, ”Some Thoughts on Ethics of Research: After Reading Milgram’s “Behavioral Study of obedience”, Baumrind explains

    Read More

  • The Background on the Stanley Milgram Theory

    1082 Words  | 3 Pages

    It is amazing to look back and realize that this experiment was done to determine how the Nazis could all have so much hate towards the Jewish people. The lack of compassion towards humans shown by the Nazi Germans during the holocaust inspired Milgram to conduct this experiment. He was curious on how any sane human being could want to participate in genocide of an entire group of people. It’s incredible to know that something like the Nazi war could bring about such valuable information to psychology. For years Milgram’s theory has been one of the primary points of social psychology. Because of the results revealed after Milgram’s creative design, psychologists use this information today to describe certain behaviors in people. I believe it is fair to say that Stanley Milgram has had one of the largest impacts in the history of social psychology.

    Read More

  • Ethics of the Nuremberg Code

    1060 Words  | 3 Pages

    Looking beyond the Nuremberg Code and applying it to modern medical research ethics, there are many challenges that it poses. Many have argued that the Code tries to provide for all unforeseen events, which restricts the researcher by requiring him to anticipate every situation, demanding the impossible. The most important contribution of the Code is the first principle, which says that voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential. The subject involved should have legal capacity to give consent, should have free power of choice, as well as sufficient knowledge and comprehension of the experiment. This restricts that populations upon which some experiment may be conducted, since many do not have “legal capacity”. For instance, studies of mental illness and children’s diseases have been curtailed because neither of these populations has the legal capacity to give consent. Another group of people, prisoners, are never really able to give voluntary consent since they might be enticed by financial rewards, special treatment, and the hope of early release in exchange for participating in the human experimentation projects. British biostatitcian Sir Austin Bradford Hill also questioned whether it was important to inform a research subject who was receiving a placebo since it does...

    Read More

More about Psy/315 Week 3

Open Document