Wk 1 forum

.docx

School

American Public University *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

PSYC500

Subject

Business

Date

Feb 20, 2024

Type

docx

Pages

2

Uploaded by Wendigo54

Report
Considering the research done by Stanley Milgram as being ethical or unethical, along with answering the question, “Was Stanley Milgram’s Study of Disobedience Unethical?” Yes, there were several indicators that should have been red flags, towards how unethical the study was. Within the research there were misleading statements and actions occurring. The goal of the research, was to see if a majority of people would conform to being obedient to authority figures. However, the authority in the research also took advantage of their position. Already in the opinion that individuals tend to comply with authority; even though it was stated that his team of researchers did not expect the results they received in the initial research (Milgram, Stanley (1963); behavioural study of obedience, n.d.) . It is obvious that there had to be some sense that he was using the assumption that he wanted to deceive the participants from the start of the research. Although the participants were debriefed after the experiment as completed, based on ethical guidelines in research with humans (Wasieleski & Hayibor, 2009) . Research with human beings have ethical guidelines that are followed, avoiding abuses of power and to protect the integrity of the research. Well known accounts of human subjects being deceived or the participants were considered mentally impaired. Even though the hypothesis and purpose of the research is not the same, between the Willowbrook Experiments and the Stanley Milgram Study. The Willowbrook Experiments injected mentally impaired children with hepatitis, wanting to track the viral infection through all of its stages (Pecorino, 2002) . There should be a benefit to the participant; however, the participants in Milgram’s study were recruited and accepted the responsibility of what was explained to them. What was learned so far, is that the participants in the Stanley Milgram Study were debriefed, after the experiment was conducted. However, the research was extremely stressful for the participants, at least on how it has been described through the literature research. The problem with debriefing is that the emotional damage has already been done. While debriefing is the researcher’s way of reducing cognitive dissonance involved in the researchers using deception, allows the researchers a way to wipe the moral slate clean (Miller, Gluck, & Wendler, 2008) . This might make the researchers feel that they are being transparent and provides for a truthful response from the participants. On the other hand, the emotional stress can take a toll on participants who might suffer from PTSD, depression, anxiety, or another disorder that could result in a negative reaction to the stress. Only focused on deception of the real purpose of the research, as it was explained as an experiment was focused on. It is there that researchers have to remain diligent to the participants in a study they are conducting. It is very possible to have a participant that suffers from a diagnosis that could have a negative reaction to an emotional or stressful situation. These individuals will need to be screened out of the process in the initial interviewing process for the research. References Milgram, Stanley (1963); behavioural study of obedience . (n.d.). Retrieved from Holah.co.uk: http://www.holah.karoo.net/milgramstudy.htm
Miller, F., Gluck, J., & Wendler, D. (2008). Debriefing and accountability in deceptive research. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal, 18 (3), 235-251. Pecorino, P. (2002). Chapter 7: Human experimentation . Retrieved from Queensborough Community College: http://www.qcc.cuny.edu/SocialSciences/ppecorino/MEDICAL_ETHICS_TEXT/ Chapter_7_Human_Experimentation/Case_Study_Willowbrook_Experiments.htm Wasieleski, D. M., & Hayibor, S. (2009). Evolutionary psychology and business ethics research. Business Ethics Quarterly, 19 (4), 399-406. Retrieved Jan 3, 2018
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help