Ethics__Human_Experimentation

Ethics: Human Experimentation Psychological research through human experimentation has unraveled profound breakthrough in understanding the human mind. Today we understand mental disorders in much greater depth than even ten years ago because of naturalistic observation, case studies and even post mortem examinations. In light of our advanced learning, it is still necessary to ask when does the quest for deeper understanding of human behavior go too far. What is ethical or unethical when carrying out experiments on living human beings' This article examines the morality of an experiment carried out by psychologist in France. Audience members were asked to press a button to send electrical shocks to game show contestants in the event of incorrectly answered questions. The reasoning behind the show was to examine and study “people’s obedience to authority”. This experiment is very similar to the experiment conducted by Stanley Milgram in the 60’s and even then it was considered controversial because although no harm was done to the “victim” some felt that the knowledge of knowing the victim was not harmed but that they would participate in something like this has the possibility of being traumatic to parties involved. I believe that the trauma experienced by participants is only due to guilt. I think there is a lot of remorse that comes after the fact of knowing that not only were you a participant, but you were willing to inflict pain upon an innocent person. This leads researchers to question or weigh the harm to participants versus the benefits gained from the scientific experiment. According to Kevin Masters, a psychologist at Syracuse University, “The basic idea that we would do things that we would not expect to do, simply when put into the right situation or right authority figure, I think is a pretty darn important thing for us to know about” ( Palca 2010). I think the importance lies not only just within the duty people feel towards authority, but also the ability to act on orders that directly conflict with one’s own personal standards. Understanding how people can make a decision to do something and feel absolved from the consequences of their actions just because they were working “under orders” is important to understand. I believe that in today’s society people feel a reduced responsibility for their actions and are easily able to justify or excuse their behaviors when said behavior is unfavorable. Have we become a society of the self-involved, self-indulgent and so narcissistic that the needs and or emotions of our fellow human beings are of no real importance to us' I think this is the real question that should be asked with this experiment. How can one propose to inflict harm on innocent people and then feel they are less culpable because they were instructed to do so' One social psychologist (referred to as Berger) hinted at this sort of self-absorption when he said once participants were told of the true experiment, and told it would appear on TV participants did not care. They were only cared that they would be on TV. “It doesn’t matter what they just did, or what you filmed, yeah they love being on television”. Almost to validate my theory the writer (Palca) of this article comments after Berger’s statement by blaming “television as a powerful tool for affecting behavior”. Although I do support the argument that human experimentation provides such profound knowledge that it should not be abolished, I do believe that with every endeavor we should measure the potential harm it may cause all parties involved. However, I also believe conducting experiments that cause bodily harm, or that are so inhumane that post-traumatic stress is a side effect is not only wrong, but socially and morally deviant. Siting scientific value as justification to complete research without any constraints would make researchers of today no better than researchers who felt experiments performed on Holocaust victims were so advantageous that it diminished the impact of the blatant cruelty to humans. Reading some parts of this article it appeared to me that there are just as many radical psychologist who believe “the end justifies the means” – and that it’s all in the name of science. Research is important in the knowledge that is learned but we must always be sure to never become so engrossed with our agenda’s that we abandon the true spirit of psychology, which is to understand, examine, learn human behavior and it’s causes in an effort to help mankind.