In order to prevent the subject from causing physical, psychological or emotional distress, the experiment Tuskegeen syphilis breaks a first golden rule of ethical science.
Therapy without anesthesia was administered and participants suffered from physical discomfort. The experiment also violated second golden rule, which calls for respondents to be made aware of the purpose of the trial. By locking them with packets like 'Survivor' and medical treatment, PHS misinformed the negares. Johnson says the PHS misleads participants by targeting them for special care (1). That is, the PHS did not inform the participants of the intention of the treatment. The experiment further violated the third golden rule since the researchers disclosed the sample population “the Negros with syphilis” (Johnson 1). This breached the rule of confidentiality.
Similarly, the Stanford prison experiment violated the first golden rule since Zimbardo caused the students psychological, emotional and physical harm by treating them like criminals.
For example, participants were confined in a cell. Baker asserts that Zimbardo kept the students from “real life” as much as possible (1). The experiment also violated the second golden rule since Zimbardo did not inform the students about some of the practices such as stripping them naked, getting their possession removed, and deloused. The experiment further breached the third rule since Zimbardo did not conceal the identity of the participants. The selection process was open to the public.
Milgram experiment violated the first golden rule of ethical research by inflicting pain to the participant.
The experimenter trapped Mr. Wallace to a chair with electrodes which caused physical and emotional suffering due to exposure to electronic volts of 450. The experiment violated rule regarding informed consent since the researcher did not inform the participants on what a given role entails. For example, experimenter paired participant with other persons and allowed them to draw lots to find who would be a “teacher” and “learner” (QuantaBR 1). The experimenter failed to inform the participants on the process and the aim of the experiment. The test also violated the third rule since it did not maintain the confidentiality of the participant. This was induced by the fact that the participants were paid $4.50.
Milgram’s aim of conducting the research was to determine how people obeyed instructions when it involved harming another person.
In my opinion, the experiment was not valuable for the society. It is not ethical to subject people to physical and emotional trauma to achieve the objective of determining human relation. In fact, the experiment behavior might not depict what happens in the society. As such, it served researcher’s purpose but did not have any value to the society.
Works Cited
Baker, Allie. “Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment Documentary.” YouTube, 27 Feb 2014, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FFWiLKA-91s.
Johnson, Paulie. “Psychology: The Stanford Prison Experiment-BBC Documentary.” YouTube, 15 Feb 2015, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gb4Q20z0T1Q.
QuantaBR. “The Milgram Experiment 1962.” YouTube, 17 August 2016, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2kqaMhm6dlg.
