Deception is another important aspect to be explored in psychology. This ethical issue is occasionally broken, this is often so that the desired outcome can be achieved more easily, because the experimenter is able to gain a true view over the candidate and gain an advantage from aspects such as leading questions. There are disadvantages to deception however, for starters the concept of deception is morally wrong, and then secondly the results may not be ecologically valid. The best example of deception that I have been able to find was in an experiment conducted by Stanley Milgram (1963) in the ‘behavioral study of obedience’. The participants in this study were told to administer electrical shocks of increasing voltage to a person they were assigned. The participants did not know that the equipment they would be using was fake and that their victims were in actual fact actors. The participants were ordered to ask the actors multiple choice questions, and if they gave an incorrect answer they had to administer a shock to them. Some of the participants went through with the experiment without questioning the motives whilst a few others questioned who would be held responsible, but after being quickly assured that they would not be held responsible, they proceeded with the experiment up to the full 450 volts. None of the participants stopped before 300 volts. The subjects that were administering the shocks were obviously deceived, as they were not told that the equipment was fake, that the victims were actors and most importantly they were not told that they were being observed.
A number of factors have to be considered when conducting an experiment regarding a person’s mental and physical wellness including stress.
The best example of the above not being taken into consideration is the study simulated by Zimbardo (1973). This study was a simulation of a prison and a simulation of prisoners and guards. There were a large number of applicants to begin with (75), but only a mere 24 subjects were selected. The subjects were divided into two different categories, prisoners and guards. The prisoners were arrested in public and were hauled off in front of everyone to see, once they arrived at the mock prison, they were told to stripe and wait in the yard until they were clothed with loose fitting uniforms. Once they were clothed they were introduced to Zimbardo, who would be playing the warden at the prison; Zimbardo greeted them and told them the rules of the prison, which they were forced to memorize. The simulated guards were fitted out with uniforms, batons and a particular style of sunglasses, to portray the image Zimbardo had of them.
It took a mere few days for the prisoners morale to have dropped so low that five prisoners had to be released early due to the stress they were exposed to. The prisoners released early were showing signs of rage, crying and anguish.
Because of variables such as the above the experiment was brought to a halt after just six days rather than the anticipated fourteen days. These results were very unexpected, and not anticipated by Zimbardo, and so seem like the experiment became too much to handle. Also the ‘prisoners’ became stressed, so therefore the experiment had to be ended abruptly.
The ethical issue of ‘right to withdraw’ has to be respected when conducting any experiment. The best example of this is seen in today’s reality show big brother, all the candidates selected to stay in the big brother house are given the right to withdraw at any time, this fact displays that the producers of big brother adhere to the ‘right to withdraw’.
Probably the most important ethical issue is the protection of the participants; this aspect actually covers the actual welfare of the participants, and so should be adhered to at all costs. Zimbardo obviously didn’t feel this was the case as the candidates who were assigned the role of the prisoners, were treated unfairly by the guards. The guards were given power over the prisoners, and took this for granted, and therefore caused the prisoner’s physical and mental stress, because of the stress caused Zimbardo could effectively be blamed for neglecting this rule.
To conclude, it seems that psychological experiments can never be accurate as when ethical issues are followed the results become biased or distorted, and if ethical issues are not followed the participants may be at risk and the experiment would be considered unethical. Therefore until ethics are neglected these psychological experiments are pointless.
