EXAM QUESTION

  1. You are on the Ethics Review Board of Yale University when the Milgram experiment passes your desk for review. State if you would let the experiment proceed or if you would stop it. Explain your answer, also considering factors that seem contrary to your decision.

Overview of Ethical Implications in Psychological Experiments

In this section, we explore the complexities surrounding psychological experiments, particularly the Milgram experiment, its ethical considerations, and relevant philosophical frameworks such as positivism, interpretivism, and pragmatism. Additionally, we analyze hypothetical ethical dilemmas concerning consequentialist and non-consequentialist perspectives.

Milgram Experiment Description

The Milgram experiment was designed to measure the willingness of participants to obey authority figures, even when such obedience conflicted with their personal conscience. The setup involved participants being instructed to administer electric shocks to another individual, who was actually an actor and not receiving real shocks. This experiment posed a significant ethical dilemma: participants were put in a position where they had to choose between following orders or adhering to their moral values.

Key Features of the Experiment

  • Participants believed they were administering painful electric shocks.

  • The experiment was conducted with a guise of scientific inquiry, leading participants to follow orders from an authority figure (the experimenter).

  • Moral Conflict: Participants faced distress from the decision to potentially harm others versus the pressure of authority.

Ethical Review and Decision-Making

The question arises: should the Milgram experiment be allowed to proceed? Considering the implications, the following points reflect a conditional approval approach:

Justification to Proceed

  1. Significant Knowledge Gain: The experiment highlights crucial insights into human behavior, particularly regarding obedience to authority.

  2. Public Awareness: Understanding the propensity to abandon moral imperatives in favor of following orders is vital for societal awareness.

Ethical Caveats for Approval

  • Participants must undergo thorough debriefing immediately post-experiment to alleviate psychological distress.

  • Researchers should acknowledge the psychological impact on participants, ensuring they understand the nature of the experiment and their role.

  • Results should be shared with participants to mitigate any feelings of guilt or distress arising from their actions during the study.

  • Confirmation of the hypothesis, which posits that individuals under duress (especially when faced with a superior) tend to follow orders over moral considerations.

  • Participants should be recognized and thanked for their contribution to scientific research.


4] Briefly describe the positivist, interpretivist and pragmatic approaches to research. State which, in your opinion, is best giving explicit reasoning for your answer.

Philosophical Perspectives in Research: Positivism and Interpretivism

In examining questions related to research methodologies, we consider two distinct approaches: positivism and interpretivism.

Positivism

  • Definition: Positivism asserts that valid knowledge is gained through observable and measurable facts. It emphasizes critical and impartial observation of phenomena.

  • Application: This approach is largely effective in physical sciences, such as chemistry or physics, where predictable patterns can be observed.

  • Limitations: The application in social sciences is more challenging due to the inherent complexities of human behavior, which is not strictly observable or predictable across different contexts.

Interpretivism

  • Definition: This approach recognizes the limitations of obtaining objective knowledge about human behavior. It emphasizes understanding specific phenomena by examining the subjective experiences of individuals.

  • Bias Recognition: It posits that researchers should identify their own biases, as observation cannot be truly impartial.

  • Evaluation Criteria: In interpretive research, a compelling and plausible argument is more important than rigid statistical validation. It often involves presenting multiple interpretations of a phenomenon.

  • Analogy: The role of a defense lawyer is to present plausible stories to the jury to construct a compelling narrative around a case.

Pragmatism in Research Methodologies

Pragmatism posits that the research question should dictate the mode of research. It advocates for flexibility in choosing appropriate paradigms based on the subject of study.

Implications of Pragmatism

  • Acknowledges that no single methodological approach is superior to another.

  • Encourages researchers to adopt the most suitable paradigm, whether positivist or interpretivist, to address the research question effectively.

  • For example, conducting team dynamics research may favor an interpretivist approach, while studying chemical reactions would favor a positivist approach.


  1. You are in a room in 1935 with Hitler and you have a loaded gun. Explain your options In terms of "non-consequential" and "teleological" ethical perspectives.

Ethical Dilemmas: Non-Consequentialist vs. Teleological Perspectives

In a hypothetical scenario involving a decision to kill Hitler in 1945, we explore the ethical implications from both non-consequentialist and consequentialist viewpoints.

Teleological Ethical Perspective (Consequentialism)

  • Focus on Outcomes: This perspective evaluates the morality of an action based on its consequences. Potential outcomes include:

    1. Preventing further escalation of WWII.

    2. The emergence of an even worse leader or regime as a result of Hitler’s elimination.

    3. Personal consequences, such as the likelihood of facing imprisonment for the act.

Non-Consequentialist Ethical Perspective

  • Moral Imperative: This perspective asserts that certain actions, like killing, are inherently wrong, regardless of potential outcomes. Key points include:

    1. The idea that one must adhere to moral principles regardless of consequences.

    2. A belief in being a force for positive change without resorting to unethical actions (e.g., killing).

Conclusion

The discussion surrounding ethical dilemmas in psychological research is intricate and multilayered, requiring careful consideration of the potential knowledge gains against the moral imperatives and psychological impacts on participants. Additionally, the philosophical perspectives of positivism, interpretivism, and pragmatism offer frameworks for understanding and conducting research in various fields, emphasizing flexibility and respect for human experience.

As students, it’s essential to engage with these ethical dilemmas and philosophical considerations to form a well-rounded understanding of both the implications of psychological research and the moral frameworks guiding such inquiries.

These notes capture the comprehensive discussions related to the Milgram experiment, ethical considerations, and philosophical paradigms in research methodologies. As you prepare for your upcoming exam, ensure you understand these foundational concepts and can articulate their significance in the context of psychological research and ethics. Good luck!