Zimbardo's stanford prison experiment, milgram, and asch's experiment (psych U2)

Ethical issues in the prison experiment

First, the participants did not believe they had an option to leave the prison and EFFECTIVELY WITHDRAW from the study; due to the extreme psychological conditions, they believed they were really in a prison.

Secondly, the participants experienced DECEPTION as they were not fully informed as to the horrific treatment they would receive. told it was an 'experiment on prison life' but were also told if they became

prisoners, many of their usual rights

would be suspended and they would

have only minimally adequate diet

and healthcare during the study.

Finally, the participants were (not protected from physical or psychological harm) as they were subject to consistent abuse by the guards, and the researcher's failed to end the study at the start of the prisoner's psychological distress.

What did the Stanford prison experiment teach us?

that regular people, given the right conditions, have the capacity to harm others, both physically and psychologically.

the psychological effects of extreme prison environments, not only on the mindsets of prisoners, but on that of the guards as well.

****how ordinary people have the capacity for oppression when given too much power.

researchers can learn from the lack of ethics in the experiment

IV

The roles (guards or prisoners)

DV

Behaviour of the individual

Conclusions/observations

As guards power and status went up, it moved the prisoners' down.

TERMINATED AFTER 6 DAYS

Behaviour of 'normal', well educated men can be significantly effected when a role they are given includes considerable power and status.

Participants

24 middle aged males judged to be 'normal, intelligent, healthy' (ordinary people)

When did it happen and how was it advertised

1971 - ad in local news for experiment on prison life for $15 a day

Milgram Experiment (obedience): aim

to measure the extent to which individuals would obey the commands of an authority figure, even when those commands required inflicting pain and suffering on another.

Involves:

Participants believed that they were harming another individual by administering electric shocks(which were fake) when instructed by an authority figure. Participants were the teachers, wuestion answerers were the students.

IV & DV

IV: The intensity of the voltage being administered

DV: The level of obedience

Results/ conclusion

People have a tendency to obey individuals who are perceived to have authority.

More specifically, people are likely to obey authority figures even if it involves inflicting harm on another person.

35% demonstrated disobedience, 65% continued to the max amount of volts.

When did it happen, how was it advertised

1963, informed that the study was for a test on memory and learning processes

Ethical issues in Milgram's experiment

a participant's full

and informed consent must be obtained prior to the

start of an experiment,

the participant's health and

wellbeing must be safeguarded

and the participant

must be informed about their rights and permitted

to withdraw whenever they choose to do so.

How did milgram not do informed consent, withdrawal rights, and not safeguard their health and wellbeing

informed consent:

the participants were intentionally misinformed

about what the experiment actually involved. - informed that the study was for a test on memory and learning processes

Consequently, the participants did not truly give

informed consent when they agreed to participate in

the research study.

There were also other deceptions,

For example, participants were introduced to

someone whom they were led to believe was another

participant, but who was in fact a confederate

safeguarding health and wellbeing:

participant as having been 'reduced to a twitching,

stuttering wreck who was rapidly approaching a

state of nervous collapse. At one point, he

pushed his fist into his forehead and muttered:

"Oh God, let's stop it." But Milgram did not

intervene and 'stop' the experiment.

Withdrawal rights:

While they were

free to withdraw in the sense that they were not

tied down or locked up in the experimental room,

it was never made clear to them that they could

withdraw.

Participants

40 male participants (20-50 years) who had a range of diff jobs

Asch Experiment (conformity)

experimented how people would rather conform than state their own individual answer even though they know the group's answer is wrong

Asch's conformity experiment: aim

To measure the extent to which individuals would conform to a majority group

Ethical issues in Asch's experiment

Deception through no real informed consent:

Participants weren't informed about the confederates, and were told that the experiment was for visual judgement

It was simply not possible to inform them that he was

conducting an experiment on conformity and expect

them to behave naturally.

Withdrawal rights:

could, but weren't told so felt obliged

Psychological harm: due to pressure and deception

Aim, IV & DV

Aim: to measure the extent to which individuals would conform to a majority group

IV: The pair of cards

DV: The level of conformity?

HYP: People would not conform in situations where they could clearly see what is correct and incorrect

Results/conclusion

74% of the participants conformed to a clearly incorrect answer at least once. 24% of participants did not conform at any point.

ALL participants stated that they felt confused and doubted their responses.

Asch concluded that people were willing to ignore reality and give an answer in order to conform the rest of the group.

involves:

A line judgement task in which participants matched a line together based on their similarity in length. people other than the participant gave purposfully incorrect , unanimous responses to see what the participant would answer

Factors that influenced participant behaviour in the stanford prison experiment

roles, labels

and social expectations (conforming to norms of the role)

power and status

Deindividuation

Guards wore sunglasses, uniforms, and carried batons, which reduced personal accountability.

Situational Pressure

The prison-like environment (cells, limited freedom, locked doors) intensified stress and compliance.

Factors that influenced participant behaviour in Milgram's experiment

1. Authority of the experimenter

Participants were more likely to obey because the experimenter wore a lab coat and was presented as a legitimate authority figure.

2. Proximity of the authority

When the experimenter was physically in the room, obedience was higher.

If instructions were given over the phone, participants were less likely to continue.

3. Proximity of the learner (victim)

When the "learner" was in the same room, participants were less likely to shock them.

4. Peer influence

If other participants refused to continue, the real participant was more likely to disobey

Factors that influenced participant behaviour in Asch's experiment

1. Group size

Small groups (1-2 confederates) → little conformity.

Larger groups (3-5 confederates) → conformity increased significantly.

Beyond 5-6 people, adding more didn't make much difference.

2. Unanimity of the group

When all confederates gave the same wrong answer → participants were more likely to conform.

If even one confederate gave the correct answer → conformity dropped dramatically.

3. Normative influence

Conforming to be liked or accepted by the group.

4. Informational influence

Conforming because you believe the group knows better or has more information.

Eg's of milgram, stanford, and achs experiment irl

Milgram - Obedience to Authority

Experiment insight: People obey authority even if it goes against their morals.

Employees sometimes carry out unethical instructions from bosses, like falsifying reports, because they feel they "have to follow orders."

Stanford Prison Experiment - Roles & Deindividuation

Experiment insight: People conform to roles and situational pressures, sometimes behaving abusively.

Individuals in positions of power may mistreat subordinates when roles and environment give them authority and anonymity.

Asch - Conformity to Group Pressure

Experiment insight: People often conform to the group even when the group is clearly wrong.

Employees/students may agree with a group decision in meetings or class discussions even if they think it's wrong, to avoid conflict.