Choice 2: Choose either the Milgram experiment or Stanford Prison Study and explore the ethics of the research. Be sure to summarize the goal of the research, its findings, and explain why it is or is not ethical How could this research be responsibly repeated today?
I will discuss the Stanford Prison Study and explore its ethical implications. The Stanford Prison Study was conducted by psychologist Philip Zimbardo in 1971 with the aim to investigate the psychological effects of perceived power and authority within the context of a prison environment.
During the study, Zimbardo assigned college student participants to the role of either prison guards or prisoners in a simulated prison setting. The goal was to observe how these assigned roles would affect the behavior of the participants. However, the study was terminated after only six days instead of the planned two weeks due to the extreme psychological distress experienced by the participants.
The findings of the study were striking, as the participants began to exhibit aggressive and abusive behavior. The "guards" became increasingly authoritarian and abusive towards the "prisoners," while the "prisoners" became submissive and displayed signs of emotional distress. This demonstrated the powerful impact of situational factors on human behavior, shedding light on how individuals can become cruel or oppressive when placed in positions of power.
While the Stanford Prison Study provided valuable insights into the human psyche within a simulated prison environment, its ethical implications have been heavily criticized. One of the primary criticisms is the lack of informed consent provided to the participants. The volunteers were not fully aware of the potential psychological harm they would experience, and the boundary between the experiment and reality became blurred. Many participants suffered long-term psychological effects as a result.
Additionally, the study raised concerns regarding the lack of intervention by the researchers into the escalating abusive behavior of the participants. Zimbardo acted as the prison superintendent, becoming complicit in allowing the unethical treatment of the prisoners to continue unchecked. This breached the duty of care owed to the participants, and as a result, the study lacked proper ethical safeguards.
If the Stanford Prison Study were to be responsibly repeated today, several changes would need to be made. First and foremost, informed consent should be obtained from participants, ensuring they have a full understanding of potential risks and the ability to withdraw from the study at any time. Ethical oversight committees should review and approve the study design, monitoring its implementation to protect the participants from harm.
Furthermore, measures should be in place to prevent extreme or abusive behavior from escalating unchecked. Independent observers should be present to monitor the conditions and ensure the rights and well-being of the participants are protected. Debriefing sessions should also be conducted after the study to address any potential psychological distress experienced.
By incorporating these ethical considerations, future research could provide valuable insights into the dynamics of power and authority while safeguarding the well-being of the participants. Conducting such studies responsibly is crucial to ensure that any potential harm is minimized and participants' rights are respected.