Science Vs Ethics

tomrees6
Mind Map by , created over 6 years ago

A-Levels Psychology (PY4 - Controversies) Mind Map on Science Vs Ethics, created by tomrees6 on 05/16/2013.

96
0
0
Tags
tomrees6
Created by tomrees6 over 6 years ago
Psychology A1
Ellie Hughes
Psychology | Unit 4 | Addiction - Explanations
showmestarlight
Bowlby's Theory of Attachment
Jessica Phillips
History - Germany 1918 - 1945
Grace Evans
Introduction to the Atom
Derek Cumberbatch
Is Psychology A Science?
tomrees6
Memory Key words
Sammy :P
Psychology subject map
Jake Pickup
History of Psychology
mia.rigby
Biological Psychology - Stress
Gurdev Manchanda
Science Vs Ethics
1 MILGRAMS OBEDIENCE STUDY
1.1 SCIENTIFIC BENEFITS
1.1.1 Milgram's research has had a lasting impact on psychological studies in many ways.
1.1.1.1 Influenced several other subsequent studies, which is one main evaluation of the benefits of the scientific method,
1.1.1.1.1
1.1.1.2 The results from the study were counter-intuitive, as Milgram stated in an interview before the study, that he believed that no one would willingly obey unjust orders.
1.1.1.2.1 As the results were counter intuitive, they have more resonance and relevance.
1.1.1.2.1.1 HOWEVER
1.1.1.2.1.1.1 These findings aren't without criticism. Mandel (1998) shows a case of a group of policemen in the holocaust who behaved quite differently, for example, being physically close to their victims did not make them disobey.
1.1.1.2.1.1.1.1 Mandel stated that Milgram was providing an "obedience alibi" and people are really motivated to do unjust things by other reasons (for example in the holocaust, Nazi's were influenced by their prejudice towards Jews).
1.2 ETHICAL COSTS
1.2.1 Psychological harm,
1.2.1.1 Lack of right to withdraw.
1.2.1.1.1 Participants were observed to "sweat, tremble, stutter, bite their lips, groan, and dig their finger nails into their flesh".
1.2.1.1.2 HOWEVER
1.2.1.1.2.1 Milgram defended himself in several ways, firstly stating that he was unaware of the psychological harm that would befall the participants.
1.2.1.1.2.1.1 Secondly, he asked participants afterwards if they had found the experiment distressing. The interview showed that 84% of people were glad to have participated, and 74% felt they had learned something of personal importance.
1.2.1.1.2.1.1.1 Milgram also claimed that his research was criticised by his findings, not the actual methods that he used.
2 ZIMBARDO'S PRISON STUDY
2.1 SCIENTIFIC BENEFITS
2.1.1 Similarly to Milgram, Zimbardo showed the effect of situational factors on behaviour.
2.1.2 Hoped the findings would change the way that prisons were run.
2.1.2.1 HOWEVER
2.1.2.1.1 There is little evidence to show that this experiment has had an effect on the way that prisons are run, in fact, prisons have become more inpersonal over the years.
2.2 ETHICAL COSTS
2.2.1 Lack of informed consent.
2.2.1.1 Guards became more violent.
2.2.1.1.1 Five prisoners were released early due to extreme depression.
2.2.1.1.1.1 Study was stopped after six days.
2.2.1.1.1.1.1
2.2.1.1.1.2
2.2.1.1.2
2.2.1.2 HOWEVER
2.2.1.2.1 Zimbardo could never have predicted the harm that would be caused to participants. Furthermore Aronson (1999) points out that humans are actually quite resillient in recovering from ditressing studies. Although Savin (1973) believed that the "ends did not justify the means".
3 CASE STUDY OF HM
3.1 SCIENTIFIC BENEFITS
3.1.1 Case studies provide rich detail into individual events that have happened, and the study of HM's memory over 40 years gave a detailed insight into human memory.
3.1.1.1 HOWEVER
3.1.1.1.1 There have been several anonymus studies that have given insight into human memory, and more recently there have been brain scans used on those with normal memory.
3.2 ETHICAL COSTS
3.2.1 Issues with conformed consent, as HM could not remember anything new for longer than 90 seconds, he could never be truly informed of what he was participating in.
3.2.1.1 HOWEVER
3.2.1.1.1 At this time, his parents were alive and very capable of giving informed consent for HM.
3.2.1.1.1.1 HOWEVER
3.2.1.1.1.1.1 After both HM and his parents had died, HM's brain was sliced up and given to the university of California, which nobody could have given consent for.

Media attachments