"From your knowledge of the ethical issues involved in social influence research to what extent can such research be justified?"

The ethical issues arising from Milgram’s experiment were protection from harm and deception.  Participants could have been psychologically damaged and they were not aware that the learner was an accomplice and that the electric shocks were not real.  In order for research to be justified, Social Psychologists have to weigh up whether the ends (benefits to society) justify the means (potential distress to participants); this is known as a “cost benefit analysis”.

Milgram argued that the participants had to be deceived in order for the study to take place.  Following debriefing 84% of the participants said they were glad they had taken part.  He also defended the study against criticism that the participants were not protected from psychological harm,  stating that they were all fully debriefed and then examined one year later, which revealed no signs of psychological damage.

Participants who wanted to withdraw from the study were also told that they had to carry on and were unable to withdraw, however Milgram contested that none of the participants were physically detained and that by coercing them to stay he demonstrated the power of obedience.  Also, Milgram did not have participant’s consent to take part in a study on obedience.

One of Milgram’s biggest critics is Baumrind (1964), he thought that the participants were deceived in two ways; they believed that the learner was another participant and that the study was about punishment when in fact it was about obedience.  This deception also raises the issue that the participants did not give their consent to take part in a study on obedience.  

Baumrind also felt that they had suffered feelings of guilt and a loss of self esteem as a result of their actions.  Baumrind stated that the right to withdraw was also violated as the participants were told to just carry on.  Despite Baumrind’s strong arguments against Milgram’s experiment the research has been called “morally significant” Erikson (1968) and has given us considerable insight into human behaviour

To conclude, a cost benefit analysis could be applied to weigh up whether the benefits to society outweigh the participants distress during the study.  It could be argued that certain ethical issues such as informed consent and deception can be endorsed but only when a cost benefit analysis has been undertaken and where alternative procedures that take into account ethical guidelines have been explored.

Dinaz Trudeau

October 2002