Critique Of The 's Theory

As the psychology is a subject of science, experiment is important part of this subject. Before

If I was doing this study, my hypothesis would be that “people, who receive an aversive stimulus every time they give an incorrect answer, will try harder to get the correct answer than those who do not receive anything”. My independent variables, which are the variables that researcher manipulates, would be the electric shocks and the emotional motivation; and my dependent variable, which is the variable that is tested and measured, would be the members’ results.

After some research the experimenter obtained opinions about the outcome of the experiment from psychiatrists, college sophomores,

The experimental study that I chose to write about is the Stanford Prison Experiment, which was run by Phillip Zimbardo. More than seventy applicants answered an ad looking for volunteers to participate in a study that tested the physiological effects of prison life. The volunteers were all given interviews and personality tests. The study was left with twenty-four male college students. For the experiment, eighteen volunteers took part, with the other volunteers being on call. The volunteers were then divided into two groups, guards and prisoners, randomly assigned by coin flips. The experiment began on August 14th, 1971 in the basement of Stanford’s psychology building. To create the prison cells for the prisoners, the doors were taken

This experiment in my opinion was useful to psychology. But I don’t agree with the methods that were applied. The researchers taught some behaviours to the monkeys that unless humans never show them how to do they will never do it by themselves, like

| -They produce data on very specific, narrow topic i.e. the relationship between two variables-Experimenting on human beings in care situations raises difficult ethical issues (Moonie, Stretch, et al, 2003).-Participants usually know that they are in an experiment which may affect the behaviour they produce-It may be time consuming(Stanley, Boswell, et al, 2009).

Whether research is experimental or developmental, there are no guarantees of perfect study processes or results, since both random and systematic errors are expected. Errors and uncertainties of a study’s outcomes surface almost every time. Faulty, aged or incorrectly calibrated instruments, during an experiment, can lead to important alterations of results. Distracting environments definitely influence the outcome. Finally, the human parameter in the sense of having ability to properly operate instruments and correctly interpret measurements definitely consist another factor of imperfect research (Bell 7-9).

To stress the prevalence of the effects of stereotypes, Steele repeated his first experiment with white men and Asian men as the subjects. As the dominant group, white people are often unaffected by the stereotype, but in this particular experiment they underperformed greatly. Stereotypes even exist within racial groups. In one experiment, Steele had older people and younger people try to memorize 30 words for two minutes. Afterwards, they would try to write down as many words as they can. The group of older people who read an article confirming that age impairs memory wrote down significantly fewer words than the group of older people that did not receive the treatment. This is also an example of ageism (Henslin, 2017). A common motif in Steele’s experiments is a reminder of the stereotype, referred to as a cue. The experiments demonstrate that the smallest hint of a stereotype is enough of a cue to cause underperformance. In an experiment with girls and boys ages five to seven, the only difference between the treatment and control group was coloring a picture of a doll.

The ethics of the study were however called into question (Banyard, 2012). One protestors among many was Diana Baumrind (Banyard, 2012). Baumrind (1964) argued whether the ‘welfare of the participants’ was considered Banyard (2012, p.79). Baumrind (1964) further criticised the experiment for the damage it could do the public’s perception of psychology (Banyard, 2012). In Milgram’s (1963) defence, he was not ignorant of the potential harm caused to participants, (Banyard, 2012). In fact, he was

An example of this is when a psychological study asked the participants to play mini golf and the test would measure natural athletic ability. The test group was all white. The study found that the white people who thought it was testing natural athletic ability did worse than the ones who didn’t. After hearing the game was going to determine, the players performance was impaired by the awareness of the stereotype that white people aren’t naturally athletic.

The main ethical issue with this experiment was the use of deception as the participants did not know the truth behind this study. Participants believe that they were shocking the learners and they were under severe stress due to this is possible that they had suffered psychological injuries. The participants have the right to withdraw from the study if they wanted; however, this was not made clear to them. Also, participants did not receive enough information about the study.

A few experiments have no scientific or medical need and they are to just show what certain things are like. Examples of this are the Stanford Prison Experiment, the Third Wave, and Blue Eyed Versus Brown Eyed Students. The Stanford Prison Experiment was a two week long experiment that a group of male college students were involved in. Half of them were prisoners and half were guards and they lived in a “mock prison”.(“Brainz.”) After a few days, “The results were disturbing.

Two people can do the same thing but have different results. The one major strength is that you would get to observe in a natural setting. You would get a first hand look at the social behaviors of children and how they would react naturally. Sometime you can not get that in a lab. The one weakness in the experimental method is that you would not get a natural reaction from the participates.

Psychological research may be undertaken on a subset of society; however the importance of the results may have an effect way beyond the group tested. The value of psychological research varies and the same results can be used in different ways by different groups of society.

The “set in stone” guidelines should be followed to control the experiments and give the jury standards to judge on. Short and long term health issues are the biggest concerns. Some experiments could make a participant crazy or fearful if given the right circumstances. Along with experiments affecting mental heath, physical health could be affected as well. One could refuse to