Ethics constitutes a point of high importance for scientific research. Particularly, the field of psychology is especially prone to generate moral dilemmas.. The development of research and the application of interventions on people’s behavior can be particularly complex, as it is not always easy to respect the margins of ethics.
Although today all research must pass through the filter of highly demanding and rigorous ethical committees, this has not always been the case. The truth is that, just a few decades ago, researchers were free to design numerous studies that, although they led to interesting conclusions, used methodologies that today would be strongly criticized for their lack of ethics. Fortunately, awareness of this issue has increased considerably in recent years and it has been determined that the end does not always justify the means.
Psychology and ethics: friends or foes?
When we talk about ethics, we are referring to a set of rules that determine what is right and what is wrong.. The aim of these rules is to ensure that no intentional harm is inflicted on research participants and that, therefore, their mental health is not at risk because of the study they are part of.
In order to ensure that all psychology researchers are well advised as to the unbridgeable limits they must respect, the American Psychiatric Association (APA) has developed a comprehensive guide that sets out how to proceed in the face of certain ethical or moral dilemmas. The APA, as a worldwide reference body, seeks to establish minimum standards to ensure the rights and dignity of all persons who voluntarily agree to take part in psychological research.
Although the advances achieved through research are of great value and make it possible to improve the lives of the population, it is not an achievement that can be obtained at any price. There is no point in advancing and learning more about our behavior if it is at the cost of harming people. For all these reasons, it is essential to comply with basic ethical standards when doing science..
As we have been saying, psychology has a dark history in its beginnings as a scientific discipline, since these ethical margins have not always existed and actions have been carried out that today would be labeled as despicable and inhumane. Because knowing the history is a good first step to avoid repeating the mistakes made, in this article we are going to compile the cruelest psychological experiments that have been carried out to date.
What have been the most disturbing psychological experiments?
Psychology in its beginnings has not been characterized, precisely, for being a rigorously ethical discipline. The lack of clear standards and ignorance, together with the desire to know more, have left the development of research to free will, and many of them are considered true atrocities from today’s perspective. Let’s review the best known ones.
1. Harlow’s monkeys
Harlow’s experiment is among the best known in psychology for his contributions to the field of attachment and bonding. For Harlow, it was interesting to know how a group of rhesus macaques formed their attachment bond according to different scenarios to which they were exposed. The researcher chose this species because their way of learning is very similar to that of humans.
In particular, Harlow selected some macaques that he separated from their mothers in order to compare their development and adaptation in relation to those that remained attached to them.. What Harlow did with the macaques he separated was to place them in a cage containing two artificial monkeys. One was made of wire, which had a milk bottle, and the other was made of plush, which offered no food.
What the researcher observed was that while the macaques would go to the wire one to drink their milk, they would soon return to the plush one for warmth. In the absence of a flesh-and-blood mother, the macaques ended up bonding with an inert object such as the plush fabric. The texture gave them the feeling of protection, care and affection that had been taken away from them.
In addition, threatening stimuli threatening stimuli were sometimes introduced into the cages, to which the macaqueIn addition, threatening stimuli were sometimes introduced into the cages, in response to which the macaque quickly clung to the cloth monkey for shelter. The macaques were also removed from the cages where they had grown up and later reintroduced, at which time the macaques would run back to their plush mother, indicating that bonding had indeed been established.
The essential conclusion derived from the study is that the macaques prioritized the need for care over food, so they spent much more time with the plush monkey than with the wire monkey.
Harlow decided to go further and also chose to place some of his macaques in an empty cage, without even artificial mothers. These monkeys lacked any emotional attachment and when presented with a threatening stimulus were only able to cower in a corner in dismay, as they had no attachment and protection figure. As we can see, although this experiment is recognized as a classic in psychology, it is not without cruelty to the animals, it is not free of cruelty to animals..
2. Little Albert
If in the previous case we were talking about animal abuse, in this case we are talking about a cruel act it is an act of cruelty towards a child. This experiment was carried out in order to obtain an empirical demonstration of the classical conditioning procedure. It was developed by John B. Watson, who was supported by his collaborator Rosalie Rayner. The study was conducted at Johns Hopkins University.
To achieve the objective, an eleven-month-old child with an adequate health status was selected. First, the previous existence of fear of the objects to be presented as stimuli in the experiment was examined. The child showed no initial fear of furry animals, although he did show fear of loud sounds. Essentially, the experiment consisted of presenting Albert with a white rat (which he did not initially fear) at the same time as a loud noise.
After repeating several trials with this dynamic, Albert began to cry at the mere presence of the rat.. That is, the association between the two stimuli had been produced, so that the rat became a conditioned stimulus. In addition, fear was generalized to many other stimuli following the same procedure. This experiment allowed empirical confirmation of the classical conditioning procedure in humans. However, the way it was achieved was at the cost of the suffering of an infant, so it must be recognized as one of the least ethical studies carried out to date.
Milgram and extreme obedience
The psychologist Stanley Milgram, from Yale University, set out to carry out an experiment to find out to what extent people were capable of obeying rules and orders even if these generate harm to others. The event that prompted this study was the Nazi Adolf Eichmann’s death sentence for his involvement in genocide. for his involvement in the Nazi genocide as the ideologue of the systematic plan to exterminate the Jewish population during the Third Reich.
During his trial, Eichmann defended himself by claiming that he was “just following orders,” asserting that the Nazi government had taken advantage of his obedience. Milgram considered the possibility that Eichmann’s words might have some truth to them, thus explaining his involvement in heinous crimes against humanity.
To carry out the experiment, Milgram began by putting up posters at bus stops, offering willing volunteers four dollars to participate in a supposed study on learning and memory. The researcher accepted people between the ages of 20 and 50 with the most varied profiles.
The structure of the experiment required three figures: the researcher, a “teacher” and a “pupil or apprentice.”. Although a lottery was drawn to see which role each volunteer (teacher or apprentice) should play, this was manipulated, so that the volunteer was always the teacher and the apprentice an actor.
During the rehearsal, the teacher is separated from the student by a glass wall. The trainee is also tied to an electric chair. The researcher tells the teacher that his job is to punish his student with electric shocks every time he makes a mistake in his answer. It is made clear that the shocks can be very painful, although they do not produce irreparable damage.
What Milgram observed was that more than half of the teachers administered the maximum shock to their trainee despite the trainee’s pleas.. Although the teachers may have been puzzled, distressed or uncomfortable, none ceased administering the shock. The role of the researcher was to insist that the teacher continue in case of doubt (“Please continue”, “The experiment requires you to continue”, “You must continue”…). Thus, the researcher’s pressures increased more and more. Although some questioned the usefulness of the experiment or refused the money, none stopped.
What Milgram concluded is that a very large percentage of people simply do what they are ordered to do, without rethinking the action itself and without any weight on their conscience, as long as they perceive that the order received comes from a legitimate authority. This experiment was a milestone for psychology, although for obvious reasons its ethics were questioned and it has been severely criticized for it.