ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 14 มิ.ย. 2024
- In the past, some psychological experiments were run in frightening and unethical ways. From using children to experimenting on unknowing subjects, these five experiments left people affected for the rest of their lives. Learn more about these fascinating ethics failures in a new episode of SciShow, hosted by Hank Green!
----------
Support SciShow by becoming a patron on Patreon: / scishow
----------
Dooblydoo thanks go to the following Patreon supporters -- we couldn't make SciShow without them! Shout out to Patrick Merrithew, Will and Sonja Marple, Thomas J., Kevin Bealer, Chris Peters, charles george, Kathy & Tim Philip, Tim Curwick, Bader AlGhamdi, Justin Lentz, Patrick D. Ashmore, Mark Terrio-Cameron, Benny, Fatima Iqbal, Accalia Elementia, Kyle Anderson, and Philippe von Bergen.
----------
Like SciShow? Want to help support us, and also get things to put on your walls, cover your torso and hold your liquids? Check out our awesome products over at DFTBA Records: dftba.com/scishow
----------
Looking for SciShow elsewhere on the internet?
Facebook: / scishow
Twitter: / scishow
Tumblr: / scishow
Instagram: / thescishow
----------
Sources:
www.theguardian.com/law/2015/...
www.apa.org/ethics/code/
www.hhs.gov/ohrp/regulations-a...
Little Albert
www.apa.org/monitor/2010/01/li...
psychclassics.yorku.ca/Watson/...
The Monster Study
ir.uiowa.edu/cgi/viewcontent.c...
www.uh.edu/ethicsinscience/Med...
The Milgram Experiment
www.und.edu/instruct/wstevens...
The Bystander Effect
www.wadsworth.com/psychology_d...
psycnet.apa.org/?&fa=main.doiL...
The Stanford Prison Experiment
www.prisonexp.org/
blogs.scientificamerican.com/b...
Photos:
Wundt Research Group: commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fi...
Participant: (sobbing) I can't believe I just killed that person.
Milgram: woah, chill out - it's just a prank bro.
You've been punked!
Sounds like your avrage youtube prank channel
Seriously
lmao that gave me a huge laugh, thank you sir.
"YO YO YO IT'S YA BOI, MILGRAM, BACK AT IT AGAIN WITH ANOTHER E P I C PRANK!"
you missed some important points on the little alberd. he was later not only afraid of rats but also of any fluffy animal and in the end he even was afraid of beards. little albert later died at the age of 6. also his mother was a nurse at the hospital Watson worked as a doctor so she probably never really had a chance to consent.
Albert's story is such a sad one :(
Sniffylocket 151 dunno, maybe died from the fear of mice?
(Joke)
Omg poor baby!
A short miserable life. Thanks, science!
Late af but I swear I read that at the time of the experiment she was actually at university and had him at the universities day care centre and that’s where they picked up little Albert? I also read that she didn’t actually know of the experiment at all until the day she pulled him out of it.
A good way to avoid bystander effect in others around you is by giving specific people tasks such as, "you call nine-one-one" instead of "someone call nine-one-one." This ensures the task is more likely to be done since the person feels that responsibility falls on to them. Also, simply knowing about bystander effect can help you to avoid it.
No, it's not my problem and none of my business. I would ignore it.
huh i never considered this but that was part of my CPR training years ago!
This also spawned the ‘What Would You Do?’ tv show.
One of my psychology classes in college did a smallish Bystander Experiment. We were to ‘trip’ along one of the sidewalks, and see how quickly someone would help. And we added different things, like: a bright jacket, a load of books, using crutches, etc. we found that women were more likely to get help. Smaller people would be helped faster. And if someone had a known medical condition, help was almost instant. Also, it depended if we yelped or cried out as we fell vs if we were silent. It was an interesting experiment. I kind of enjoyed it…
Yeah, this was one of the things that was drilled into my head as part of my CFR training with the Order of Malta.
@@toptengamermoments I don't expect to be helped. I expect everyone to take advantage of me. That person's not coming to help, but to rob me.
Another unethical point against Milgram is that if a participant asked to stop, they were given 4 verbal 'prods' such as "the experiment requires you to continue" before they were allowed to leave, making them believe that they had to finish and therefore breaking the 'right to withdraw' ethical guideline. The distress caused by Milgram's study was also so severe for some participants that 3 of them had seizures.
+
Do you have a source for that? Specifically for the 'seizures' some participants endured?
Nope, nobody had seizures.
Edit: Turns out they did.
@@LEPShot262, Milgram's Behavioral Study of Obedience is the source. He described seizures on page 375.
library.nhsggc.org.uk/mediaAssets/Mental%20Health%20Partnership/Peper%202%2027th%20Nov%20Milgram_Study%20KT.pdf
@@KokosNaSnehu2, did you even read the study? He described 3 participants having seizures one of which so severe that they had to end the experiment early. Here's a picture since you couldn't seem to find it.
pasteboard.co/HFDplHq.png
Actually the bystander effect could be explained by Cialdini's "social proof". In an unknown or unfamiliar situation, we observe others to adapt our behaviour, because most of the time, the behaviour of the majority is the most suited. It's not just that we're waiting for an other person to act, we're in fact not sure how to react so we observe others. But if the others are also observing, it can lead to a situation where nobody moves and looks around, a collective incapacity.
I feel this sounds obvious as if might be wrong and stupid fool for missing the point, but in the bystander effect of which crowd size affects responsibility of self to say or act or respond to be a ratio observed easily, how does this effect miss the fact that if we were in situations of which response is essentially always a possibly known/unknown of awareness here, but despite awareness, it be potential danger/threat to us and being alive is kind of; the core of every single one of us as overall we did have Darwin kinda speak on this evolutionary survival which yes, is our alert system inbuilt to keep survival instinctual, and maybe bystanding is not really about responsibility but leaves a great huge hole as to why people wouldn't react.. As also if the scenario controlled 100% risk to any danger to us I'm sure responsibility then would be a ratio of people reacting be majorly and anyone else be choosing to not react despite it costing nothing to what sounding like those labelled in "Sick/C**t" terms. Am I missing entirely out reason or something thinking that perhaps we do not respond in our own chance of instinct to survive, be sounding a huge flaw over putting it really to responsibility and crowd size, as doubting my whole understanding of this because it sounds too obvious to me? As your comment actually read to me as what the effects of crowds do on influence us to bigger crowd number, quicker we feel uncomfortable to oppose. And bystander responsibility easily could be that known fact; especially if increase numbers are decrease oppose; essentially react as different to and reading this I feel you tapped on a huge missing gap as well.. I think this effect based more on the two missing factors explaining why no one responds instead it be sole responsibility causal alone. As I know and admit the other 2 are my own reason if not respond in situational theory here, responsible I feel is not going to be first calculated nor really would be in mind when mid-witnessing, I would feel responsible to do what to equally be each persons minus the group of minority, in feel responsibility to react in situations. Anyone like they deserve some label of more human iinstinct as hero when in situations where such person often runs into the knowing of how actual death risk is but however they do so in order of saving another life, and heroic is these rare types, sacrificially a saint like non-human instinct based persons we do name as heroic but hear in news a single act of what is going against survival and truly they are so few they do have name read or highlighted across our massive population, rightly so, but shows some reason linking to that in a rare responding few are the norm against what is shift of responsible to another, as few in population respond because of instinctually driven most are to get from threat to safe in anything of life..
Also diffusion of responsibility. Assuming someone else will step in leads you to stand back.
Like 50-leven folks standing around watching a cop kneel on a mans neck and MURDER him instead of mobbing the cops to stop them.
@@froggybug wow you just changed the whole world with your comment *sarcasm alert*
Very interesting thanks for sharing this perspective!
Fun fact, there was a later experiment similar to the milgram experiment except this time, they wanted to know what personality types were more likely to rebel against the "authority figure" so they got information from friends and family about the subjects' personalities.
The result: The people most likely to refuse to shock the person were described as outspoken, opinionated and confrontational.
So yeah, those annoying people always making long winded speeches about what's wrong with the world? They may annoy you, but they're almost the most likely to stick up for you against authority.
But is it good that they would stand up against authority
When appropriate. When authority is acting unethically or illegally.
*****
then it's good but when do those people think when something is unethical? if they for instance allow industries who produce meat?
McGlow
true but everyone has a different perception of good and evil
Derren Brown, Heist special? Yeah, he hypnotised them after to undo the effects he may have caused on their minds though after the various tests so that was cool.
I was dead ass like "why does this guy look like off brand John Green" then realized it's his brother LMAO
OFF BRAND JOHN GREEN-
you did not just tell us you thought he was like the cheaper version of a John Green
Yeah, that's ridiculous. John is clearly off-brand Hank.
@@user-pv1kt7qq8d he just looked like John Green but slightly off for me 😂
This whole thread. Beautiful.
Who's John Green?
Hank, my psychology teacher linked 3 videos for us to watch, and this was one of them. After suffering through the first two boring, life-draining videos, I managed to muster up the courage to watch the third, and when I saw SciShow and your beautiful face, I was transported to cloud nine! I watch your videos just for fun, I love you!!
You had to "muster up the courage" to actually watch the video shown in class? 😆😆 wow pathetic. I bet you don't get good grades if you can't even pay attention on video day
@@SaraS-jq1ln top of my class, actually in line to be valedictorian. That's what makes this comment hilarious 😂
@@SaraS-jq1ln pAthEtIc
@@SaraS-jq1ln you're pathetic lmao
@@SaraS-jq1ln are you okay? Do you perchance not have a loving father? You being bullied?
Now they call it Social Experiment
That isn't even close to being correct.
You aren't even close to understanding sarcasm
+Gueldener Larry oh my bad. I fully understand sarcasm. Just hard to detect it through text
[[[[[[GONE WRONG]]]]]
It's just a prank bro
In the 7th grade spelling bee, I was asked to spell Pavlovian. I got it right, now I get nervous when I hear that word.
ThruThe9 okay... I'm sorry but why?
Xandra M. Read the comment or watch the video
Clever
@@genshinreads6024 can you explain?
Swift Abduction No I can not. I, to this day, do not understand
the Bystander Effect happens so much in the real world.
example: a horrific scream rings out in a small neighborhood. everyone living nearby assumes that someone else has called police, so nobody actually calls.
Call just incase but sadly people won’t
I remember one time when I was in middle school I heard a blood curdling scream from a few streets over. I was about to call police but my dad intervened and stopped me, saying it was "probably already handled".
Next morning, there was crime scene tape all over a nearby apartment complex.
@@SageArdor imagine what could have been prevented if you had just called.
Little Albert actually ended up being scared of EVERYTHING white and fuzzy 😵 poor little guy!
The baby was quite sick so it's unclear where his fear was a result of the experiment. The experiment has never successfully been replicated.
@@charliedavis5787 Well, Jim conditioned Dwight with the Windows startup sound and mints, so there's that.
I think the little homie died when he was 6 or so...
I heard that some of the monster study kids that didn't have stutters to begin with started stuttering from the negative feedback. A documentary I saw said that some kids also became so withdrawn they wouldn't speak at all.
Sailrjup12nh of course
The stanford experiment was better at showing what happens when authority operates without oversight. The fact that they were given clubs and told "do whatever it takes" simply recreated why prisons were hell-holes for thousands of years, why many societies led to revolutions, and why a dictator style government can create genocide. The participants taking on roles was less important than it being a reminder that unrestrained power always goes badly... which we could easily learn by cracking a history book
I'm sorry but "were" hellholes? Have you seen a modern american prison? Have you looked at the documentation on what happens to "enemy combatants" in the hands of american military? Lets not pretend this is some bygone barbaric practice that we've successfully rooted out of society...
Actually, yeah they used to be allot worse, so did "mental institutions" you can't just whip out a self-righteous false-equivalency fallacy here lol, no body said we didn't still have a long way to go.
it's tragic that everytime we win over the system, they build even menacing one but don't improve on intentions
Lord of the Flies
Who watches the watchers?
"The prisoners were searched, then given ID numbers to dehumanize them." School be like
School is like that on purpose, It was designed to initiate kids into the work force, But it never changed
The bells tell you when to leave, your every action is controlled even going to the bathroom.
This formula never changed even though the workforce did...No longer an assembly line destiny for all..so..Screw you School
Or as Ariana Grande would say, Like omg I hate americans lol
Naoiph; college
I see you all over the place
@@liambrunner3026 Probably because I'm a literal meme
@@naoiph6924 One school I went to did that, my math teacher didn't even know my name lmao. To be fair, their were 90 kids in my class, but still
The Milgram experiment is completely unethical, but I've always found it fascinating. It explains how so many atrocities can be committed around the world.
Honestly, yes. I still want to see the proper details of the experiment to see if it was truly scientific, but from what little I know, it makes us face some uncomfortable truths about ourselves. It's easy enough to say 'no' to an authority figure if you know something is wrong, but the real challenge is fighting the pressure that comes with it. Irl, it might translate to facing said disgruntled authority figure for a prolonged period of time & other consequences and also, people do have social equivalents of his 'verbal prods' going on, which do push them to do what they might not have done otherwise. This must be a common occurrence in soldiers, a lot of who throughout our history weren't specialised fighters but civilians with bare minimum physical training. At least we recognise PTSD in soldiers now, back then they had to return to the normal grind and battle it silently for the rest of their lives.
It was totally rigged tho and was designed in a way that the participants almost couldn't refuse to finish the task.He did years of research leading up the his actual experiments just to assure he would have his one way ticket to fame. So it isnt as accurate as you would think!
The Milgram experiment was also repeated a few times. The first time it was either done at Harvard or Yale I forget which so they thought that since it was held at a prestigious ivy league college that the results may have been skewed. When they repeated it, they found an old warehouse and set up shop there and repeated the same experiment and the results were exactly the same.
@@cg0825 BUTT..... THAT'S JUST TWICE! THE "TRUTH" MUST BE REPETED UNTIL THE FIRST GLITCH SURFACES, AND THEN ON AND ON BEING MEASURED UNTIL THE SECOND HAPPENS. WOULD THAT SATISFY A-I?
why am I not surprised that the Stanford prison experiment was on the list
Because everyone learns about it in school so it's one of the few you actually already knew about...
It's something everyone knows about.
To those who just said something to the effect that it's "one everyone knows about"....? that's all the more reason for it to NOT be in this video. If we already know about it, tell us about others we DON'T know. That doesn't make any sense as a reason to be included in a video on a channel that's goal is to teach us new things.
The only reason you made this comment is that you wanted to show off with your knowledge of that one psychological experiment. Your intentions are so transparent and predictable.
because it's relevant
Milgram did a lot of variations of that experiment, and most of them had varying results. When you take all of the experiments together (not just the widely publicized one), it actually shows that people DON'T respond all that well to authority (almost everyone refused to go further when told "You MUST continue"), but they can do some awful things if they believe what they're doing is for the greater good.
The “Monster Study” is SO frustrating to me. I have a speech impediment(I was born with a cleft of the soft palette) and I had to do speech therapy for years and still am doing speech therapy. I have an extremely high pitched voice and often breathe through my nose and have a nasally voice. My speech teacher does provide positive support BUT I’ve been around people and still am around some people who will undermine me and act negatively towards me because of my voice. I currently have a lot of self confidence issues when it comes to speaking and I wish there was better positive feedback when kids with speech impediments or kids who go/went to speech therapy get since it can cause a lot of issues with talking if you don’t get that proper support.
My issue isn't even that bad yet it still gives me anxiety to speak in public. But i can't say i had support so.. just "that's not how you say it !" Or mocking me for saying some words wrong. It's Dyslalia and sometimes I stutter too.
(Didn't stop me from being fluent in two languages. English and French.)
Paul Stamets speaks openly about how he was able to counteract his stutter. May or may not help.
@@fpsRhythm I actually don’t have a stutter, I have an extremely nasally voice as well as an extremely high pitched voice, speech therapy helps with my nasally voice but I’m going to hormone therapy to help with my high pitched voice since that is an issue with hormones. But thank you anyways!
How old are you? If you are still young enough to still be in school (not college/university) I'm pretty sure this is something that will get much better for you overtime! Adults are a lot nicer in general than kids/teenagers, in my experience. In elementary school I had to take speech classes because I had a bad stutter and in middle school my voice/stutter gave me so much anxiety that I couldn't speak at all even when I wanted to. I even got sent to detention once because I couldn't answer a teacher's question when they called on me. lol I've been out of school for almost a decade now and I don't really have any problems with my voice anymore. I've had like 1 person maliciously make fun of my voice in that entire decade, whereas in school I got made fun often enough (and just remember that anyone who makes fun of you for a speech impediment is a miserable person in general so I don't take it too personally, or try not to). Anyways best of luck to you!
Same I was born with a cleft lip
I don’t think he truly went into how cruel the Stanford Prison Experiment was
It didn't even study what Zimbardo claimed he was studying. He claimed it was about prison conditions. Due to his meddling with his own experiment because it wasn't initially showing the "innate cruelty of humans," it became a compliance and conformity experiment. According to a similar experiment in the UK, there wouldn't have been problems had Zimbardo simply been an obssrver rather than suggesting the guards be more aggressive and stirring up trouble. According to some interviews, the participants figured out what Zimbardo wanted from them and played their parts hoping for good grades and approval in return.
Even though it was cruel, I still think it was important. It tought us alot about psychology and pulling experiments.
@@uv-al It really didn't though, it was a horribly constructed experiment so in the end it wasn't even testing what it was supposed to and came to no reliable conclusion other than "in some circumstances humans can become very cruel" which we all already knew
The only thing it taught us is that Zimbardo is a complete hack and will do anything to get the results he is looking for. The experiment is completely useless.
@@uv-al No, it was just sick. We learned nothing new and Zimbardo is seriously troubled.
i knew the Standford prison experiment would be on here before i saw it
That and the Milgram study.
Sick 🤙
Wood Splitter yeah weird how I knew of those beforehand. And the bystander one.
When i was a yoinger teen I first learned about it by watching a movie from Germany that was based on this experiment. Afterwards I looked it up to learn more.
the study was later actually debunked as it turned out the lead researcher had pushed the prison guards to be more forceful with the prisoners. The same study was repeated later by BBC iirc but because the guards weren't influenced by anyone to treat the prisoners harshly, they ended up being very friendly, sharing food and playing cards with them. This made for bad TV of course so the show was discontinued I believe
I was once subject to unethical psychological treatment...
But, enough about my ex-wife.
Like those guys in the prison experiment, at least you got laid once in a while...
cougarhunter33 Oh, really? Screwed yes. Laid, no so much.
I've never even seen you before!
My ex-wife I'm the guy with the broken heart and crushed soul.
You've gotta remember me....
OK, YOU TWO IDIOTS HAVE PERMANENTLY SCARRED ME PSYCHOLOGICALLY!!!
Oh the humanity of it all.
The Sarchasm is deep and wide....
The Stanford Prison experiment was also deeply flawed -- the students realized what their boss wanted and played along with it, which negates most of the value of the experiment.
I once saw an experiment involving elementary school students and their eye color. They made blue eyes superior to brow then switched to brown being better than blue. It was a powerful thing to see.
you’re thinking of jane elliott.
That is what is happening today with CRITICAL RACE THEORY.
@@janellethebelle3536 you don’t know what critical race theory is, do you? Define it for me.
Abigail S. Critical race theory is simply “different races exist, and we need to acknowledge that” and NOT “this race is better than this race”
also completely unhetical because the children couldn't give any kind of consent but especially because they weren't informed of it being an experiment or even a game.
they were debriefed afterwards but that's too little
The more I learn about people, the more I like my cat!
Your cat thinks you're an idiot. Source: every cat I have ever had.
You give it free food, comfy home, baths and you clean its filth. From the cat's perspective, you're a sucker.
The more I learn about people and cats, the more I like dogs. You have to clean up their messes too, but occasionally they bite people you don't like.
Cats don't care about their owners. Hell, they don't even think they have owners. They think they own you.
Viktor6665
They care a LOT about you. Specifically what you'll taste like when you finally fall down and stop moving.
I like pretending to be smart while watching these videos.
For the Bystander Effect, I actually have called 911 a couple times because I know about it and I reasoned "it's better they get a few calls than none at all."
If I didn't already know about the Bystander Effect, I'm not sure if I would have done the same thing. I hope I would, but we'll never know for sure. But I do know I helped at least once because I found out, while I was on the phone with 911, that I was the only one in the immediate area with a cell phone. I could have just walked by.
So don't let the Bystander Effect get ya, be the help.
Nr 1, Why couldnt they use a pozitive feedback like in pavlovs dogs
Example: Every time he touches the rat he can have a candy bar.
That's operant conditioning, not classical conditioning. It's not what they were trying to study
He would probably be too scared to do it anyway
Or an angel gets its wings
Just tuned in at the start; I bet the Stamford Prison Experiment makes the list.
I bet you $100
that you're right.
Nope, but the stanford experiment is!
yup
its written Stanford. learn to spel
Xiefux in all my years of being a student, I've never learned to "spel"! what is it?
9:50 "you cannot do this study today"
Most police officers and prisons replicates this study every day
Not only that. It also applicable to a lot of heirarchical systems.
Have you ever even been to a police department or prison?
I take it you've never been arrested or had to spend time in jail?
OP is not wrong.
Guy Shepard Yes, have you?
Gem Monger And who are you going to report the violated laws to? The police? The same ones who committed them?
Kid grow up and get arrested once, the judicial system is far more fucked up then it seems.
Something you failed to mention with the Milgram experiment is that when the test subjects were told they HAD to finish, almost all of them refused. It was only when subjects were given free will that they took the experiment to the extreme.
somehow understandable.
thinking about relationships rn.
A wife tells her husband "thake out the trash". He knows it's his job. He knows it needs to be done. He doesn't like her tone so he doesn't do it.
A wife says "do whatever you want" and there he is taking out the trash, saying sorry, asking what's wrong and overthinking what he did.
I have seen it happen (in various contexts - thankfully none so serious as killing someone) enough time to wonder about it.
Is it a problem with authority or is it that when instructions and consequences are not well defined they are so much scarier than when they are?
@@wisteria3032 or maybe because humans like to be in control but that’s just a guess
yeah the prison experiment was crazy. especially since the guards were also coached on how to behave, and the dude who had the breakdown and left later said he was pretending to break down because he had an exam to study for or something.
If you did it today all you would need to say is ''It's a prank bro!'' and point to a camera.
Unless the other person sues you because you admitted to comitting assault on the mental wellbeing for your fun.
Personally I see no difference between trying to scar my skin and my psyche. If anything the psychological attack is worse and longer lasting.
I watched this video and then the next day, my psych teacher asked us about these exact experiments. Needless to say, the teacher was impressed.
the one about the kids with stutters is so sad. it’s bad enough having a stutter and never feel like you say things quite right - it’s worse to tell a child that to the point of frustration and depression.
The monster experiment couldn’t have just been orphanages. I was in first grade when my teacher told me I couldn’t be in class with normal kids and would have to learn one on one with a speech therapist because I couldn’t pronounce my R’s. My family already teased me at home about it and then I was forced to be taken out of class. I suffer with intense social anxiety and have never been able to have a comfortable social interaction since I can remember...
yasmeen peyton yep special education classes continue this to this day more so in less privileged areas
@@Fritaly I hate special class. I've never been in one myself but we have one at our elementary school and the kids would always avoid/make fun of the sc students. I'm ashamed to say that I myself have avoided them too because at the time I thought they were weird.
But in highschool I was in a science program, for the smart kids ( and people who were lucky enough to score high, including me ) and there was this one girl who was in a wheelchair and it shocked me a bit because the kids didn't avoid her nor laughed at her and she was actually one of the popular kids, of course there were some factors to take in like she was one of the smartest and we were already teenagers but you know...
I love how every single one of your clickbait titles actually deliver. Keep the videos coming
unlike dnews
if its all real its not clickbait
I've said it once, I'll say it again. That's called using a title for it's intended purpose, not clickbait.
Copper Kitsune It baited you to click, but it gave you a happy life in an aquarium instead of on a plate
[gone unethical]
[gone traumatizing]
I may be a little late but there are some discrepancies in the video. John B. Watson never unconditioned Little Albert because he was never given the chance. His mother took him one day and ran off somewhere. If I'm not mistaken he did the same thing to another child, but was given the opportunity to un condition him (doesn't change the ethicality of it, however). 2nd, subjects were debriefed at the end of the Milgram experiment. They all met with the actor and were told that they did no harm to him. Milgram knew that he didn't want people walking around thinking that they had, or still could, harm people so mindlessly.
Those aren't discrepencies, they told the correct facts. They just left out some details on what happened after
Ever been abused? Like... I have good and bad memories with my abusers. It’s because abuse is a cycle. Reconditioning isn’t gonna be the same as before the baby was conditioned to be terrified. If anything he will lose trust in himself to know when something is scary or not.
In the Milgram experiment that you referenced, he did debrief them after the experiment was completed. In the Zimbardo experiment he (Zimbardo) encouraged the "guards" to be abusive to the "prisoners" (both groups were students).
Rather interestingly, the students in the Stanford Prison Expariment weren't the only ones who slipped easily into their roles. Zimbardo himself adjusted very well to the role of Warden and had to have some sense yelled into him.
Vault-Tec calling!
Vault 11 was brutal!
Vault 69 (insert Lenny face)
+Poseidon ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
NCR PROUD!!
Gary!
When you know 4/5 of these experiments from a college psychology course, and none explained them to be unethical, just the facts of what happened. XD
I thought they explained well on why it was unethical
It's literally just "Ferb, I know what we're gonna do today"
i believe that most of the criticism the milgram experiment got was because that a great many people just simply didn't like the conclusions of that experiment. no person in that experiment actually reported that they somehow were permanently damaged by the experiment itself. each participant was also debriefed after the experiment was over, as to assure that they hadn't actually hurt anyone.
it was more that it was just uncomfortable while it was going on. yet, most people choose to stay and continue the experiment, even though they could say no and choose to leave(which some did). which is exactly why this experiment is so interesting to begin with.
when people are confronted with negative or uncomfortable truths about themselves which doesn't paint them in a good light, they will usually fight it, instead of trying to learn anything from it.
and when you got a society very much based around authority and obedience on so many levels, and an experiment like Milgram's shows up and starts to probe that very notion, of course people will object to it. but that's a more political question than an ethical one.
was the Milgram experiment unethical? not so much.
did we learn some uncomfortable truths about the average human being? yes, very much so.
Making someone think they killed someone is a bit morally questionable.
+Paul Mahoney so is keeping pushing the button that actually kills the person. Yet, most keep people kept pushing that button.
And like I mentioned, they were all briefed as soon as the experiment was concluded about what had just happened. They got to meet the person they thought they were giving electrical shocks and informed of what they were a part of. No person were left with actual psychological trauma, although they might have learned something new about themselves for participating in the experiments, and as such might have been changed by the experiment.
+Paul Mahoney if you ever get the opportunity to watch the move, "the experimenter" it covers his work pretty well
Technically, the authority figure also got to verbally order the subject to continue with the experiment three times every time he or she expressed concerns, with the last one being a noncommittal but still unyielding statement to the effect of "You MUST continue the experiment."
I'm frankly surprised anyone backed out at all, but I guess there will always be heroes. Since those are so few though, you can usually find them in unmarked graves, if they're lucky someone writes their names on a wall somewhere... =p
I recall reading about that experiment a few years back. If I recall correctly, the reason this experiment came into existence was to explain how and why German guards in WWII could put so many people to death in the camps. It showed that people could detach themselves emotionally from the actions they were performing, as long as you followed the reasoning of "I was just following instructions."
To be more specific, this does not reference that the Belmont Report is very outdated. Initially the Nuremberg Code was laid out, followed by the Declaration of Helsinki (DoH) and after the Tuskegee experiment the Belmont Report was produced. There are very important distinctions between these regulations, initially the Nuremberg code was not concerned with patient harm and instead valued social benefit.
There are now international regulations that are applicable for Clinical trials. ICH (International Conference on Harmonisation) is the standard although from a US perspective ICH is not adopted, but followed.
I am in Canada where ICH is adopted and we also have TCPS2 (Tri-Council Policy 2) to follow, which heavily overlap. We must keep records for 25 years while ICH and the FDA only require 2 years after a drug reaches market.
source: I work In clinical trials and deal heavily with US-Canada trials. I'm required to know all applicable regulations for both countries.
dam, that's really cool
I remember witnessing two kids (probably around 13-14) having a fight, and the lack of response I saw there was absolutely astonishing.
This was at a bus stop right after school, so everyone was waiting for the bus to arrive and was just watching the fight break down between these kids (year/grade 7-8 kids I assume, here in Australia we don't do middle school, so you start highschool at year/grade 7). Aside from the obligatory kids who were probably recording, everyone else was perfectly content just watching it happen.
I kinda noticed it late but I was the only person to walk in and stop the fight before it got really serious, though I still hesitated to go there for a good second or two.
Considering I was a senior and bigger than them, it wasn't that hard to break up the fight, but it's still amazing how when you see no one else react you have hesitations about reacting too.
It made me wonder though, if they were my age or my size, would I have been as willing to stop the fight?
I was in such a situation once and it took me this post to understand it was bystander effect.
I was in high school - around 16.
Exchange student in New Zealand.
I was having lunch with another exchange student I had become quite friends with when we heard someone screaming. We went to see what was happening and there were two boys fighting and about 20 people around them just standing still.
At the time my reaction was completely standard: I wanted them to stop but I also knew I was weaker than them. I was scared that if I tried to intervene I would get caught up in it (not scared of the teachers but of getting hurt. I was bigger and older than them but very weak - the "my arms hurt when I hold up my phone" kind of weak). I thought if someone else helped me I would go but as an exchange student I knew no one and I didn't want to ask strangers or to endanger my only friend (she was more petite than me, also she was frightened and wanted to get away asap).
Also I didn't really know what to do - I had never witnessed a fight before and definitely had never seen how to break one up.
I really wanted to go but just didn't have the courage to try.
I could have called a teacher but didn't know where to find one, didn't want to be a snitch (since I didn't
know why they were fighting) and didn't want to go away from there: I wanted to see what happened.
At some point I remember thinking "This has to stop so I'll count to 30 and if no one does anything I swear I'll intervene"
While I was counting in my heas a girl that was half my height and probably 3 years younger than me came in yelling at them to stop. I think she knew them. She just went in there and grabbed one and pushed away the other and kept yelling all the time. They stopped. Everyone went away.
My friend was a bit shocked and scared. I was embarrassed and kept thinking I should have intervened before the other girl showed up.
I highly recommend Zimbardo’s book The Lucifer Effect, where he analyzes the Stanford Prison Experiment and other phenomena after decades of reflecting. He doesn’t try to justify for the experiment. Actually he goes to great lenghts to show how flawed and misguided it was. But he has some great insights to human frailty, and how easily we are drawn into situations. And the only protection against it is to acknowledge it.
I think the biggest mistake we can possibly make is to read the analysis of someone so caught up in the experiment that his own girlfriend had to persuade him to stop, only by threatening to leave him. None of the results have been replicated since and most of the guards have since said that they were specifically told to be more sadistic. The worst kind of fake psychology,
@@davidhopkins8967 Did you not read my comment? I already explained that the book DOES NOT justify the experiment, DOES NOT gloss it over, and DOES NOT lie about it or try to re-invent it or validate the results. He goes into great detail about every misguided decision, every flaw, and everything that happened. Including how his partner made him see sense. He spesifically calls her the hero of the story for doing that. He wrote the book decades after the experiment, and he has since delved deep into the things that make people act against their better nature, himself included.
But the experiment and it’s aftermath is only a part of the book. It goes deep into the phenomena that makes people act with extreme cruelty in war, how entire nations are swayed to follow dictators, how easy it is to make us believe horrendous acts of violence and persecution are ”justified.”
I’d argue that is insight into our flaws we need. Yes the experiment was misguided and harmful and not a very good piece of research. ZIMBARDO KNOWS THAT. But it doesn’t mean he hasn’t learned important things, or that he hasn’t done a lot of worthwhile work in his 50+ year career.
@@undertasty yes I did read your comment. Zimbardo has spent years deflecting and gaslighting any criticism of his work from others. In my view he has nothing to add by talking about his own feelings. It’s all just bad science.
The by stander effect in depth: In a risky situation when playing the hero comes into mind think about the pros and cons. Playing the Good Samaritan gives you a well accomplished feeling and the possibility of making a new friend. But their is always the chance of it going bad like getting injured, permanently disabled, or even killed. Killed is probably the worst one because you'll leave behind a caring family and they might have to pay for all the death expenses, real talk
The selfish gene...
death costs money?
@@alexwang982 Yes, death cost money. That's why they have funeral parlors.
@@Catlily5 Funerals cost money, death doesn't
@@alexwang982 Death could be free. Die in a hospital and even death may not be free. Birth could be free too but it usually isn't.
I like to take each SciShow episode title as a challenge. "Oh yeah SciShow? Watch me perform the psychological experiments." or "Watch me digest this grass."
Sometimes this goes on in home as well, kids will sometimes get punished or physically harmed for getting bad grades, the justification for it is that punishment will encourage them to try better in school.
More recently, Michael Stevens of Vsauce and Mind Field conducted the First ever Experiment based on the Trolley Problem. He consulted an ethics board and two Psychologists in order to conduct it without causing Psychological damage to the participants. The results were interesting.
It's worth noting that what you see in Mind Field is edited by TH-cam, and not representative of the full study. I believe Michael said elsewhere that they ran several more people through, and the Mind Field episode included the only two who pulled the switch. There were far more people than we see who never actually pulled it.
the Stanford prison experiment gives me the chills it's so scary.
When did they update the comment section on mobile, its weird
It sucks
+HeadShotPR cant like , like if u cant too
It did let me dislike ^^
It's so badddd
At least we now have more features
Wow. In my phycology class we watch videos of zimbardo from like the 80s or 90s and had no idea he did something like that. This changes my entire view of good old Phil
The man was a complete hack and manipulated the students to try to get the results he was looking for. He is not well respected and his research is pretty much universally disregarded as bunkum.
The more you learn about people, the more you like animals. Especially my dog.
The Milgram Experiment was one of my favorites to learn about in Sociology. It's very telling, and very unethical in that participants couldn't be informed so how could they consent? Sure, it taught us that most people will listen to authority (which explains why so many horrible things have happened on national or international scale) but not in the right way.
The Milgram Experiment HAS been done recently, in the past 5 years at least. So it can be done today, I suppose you'd just have to write up the correct legal document for it.
in Denmark they made a reality program about it.
No, it has not.
The study that "recreated" it used lower-level simulated shocks and responses - there was no simulated responses of extreme distress and potential death.
They did this *specifically* to avoid the ethical issues of the Milgram experiment.
It's not the Milgram experiment if you're specifically avoiding replicating the conditions of the Milgram experiment.
The Stanford Prison Study was also replicated (without the researchers meddling in order to stir up conflict). It turns out, when you re-create that scenario without a researcher who can have power over your grades, graduation, job recommendations, etc suggesting that the guards be more aggressive and the prisoners be more rebellious, you don't get the problems that occurred in the Stanford experiment. The participants at Standford figured out what Zimbardo wanted from them and complied, believing that it could affect future grades, graduation, and job opportunities.
I know a girl in high school who tried to condition her crush to be excited to see her by always having a bag of his favourite candies in her purse and giving some to him whenever they met.
And the thing is, it kind of worked 😆 You could see how he lit up whenever he spotted her in a corridor, and then get this slightly confused look on his face about the strength of his own excitement 😂
i remember seeing this story on tumblr omg
she's a genius
"the Lucifer principle" is an interesting read about the Stanford prison experiment. Even though the experiment was flawed and it has been refuted it is still quite shocking to read the extend of the abuse in the experiment.
Surprised there's no mention of MK-Ultra
Because it was blatantly illegal, even at the time.
you can still practice the MK-Ultra experiments, duuh
+
it sounds familiar, but I can't remember what it is, could you remind me? o:
When you look at the video, all the experiments correlate on the basis that they were done as an academical study.
I've seen the bystander effect even when it's not a serious situation. It's happened multiple times where I've been watching a movie in a theater and something went wrong with the screen or sound. I would see everyone else looking around but no one would go tell the staff. In every instance where this happened I was the one to go out and tell them. I've never been hesitant about taking initiative but this has happened at least 5 different times that I can remember and each time the rooms were packed, yet it was always me. Statistically this shouldn't be and yet that's what happened.
Could Sci Show make a video about peanut allergies please? Like, how and why they're so common and so dangerous? Thanks!
I remember learning about these in grade 12 Psychology, specifically the Milgram Experiment and the Stanford Prison Experiment. These are usually the first things we were taught about.
If you go to college and take social psych they go into most of these experiments and in more detail...and then some. You really learn about the evil nature of some in the world.
But can psychologists see why kids love Cinnamon Toast Crunch?
Sugar = dopamine. Not that hard.
@@Guru_1092 you must be fun at parties, if you even go to parties....
@@riogrande163 I'm actually pretty fun at parties. You'd be surprised how much people enjoy hearing about my stories as a firefighter, or about my trip to Europe.
@@Guru_1092 still a total buzzkill.
lmao
The stanford prison experiment was a fantastic movie, it really shows how insane the experiment actually was
The thing that really framed the flaws in the experimental design of the Stanford Prison Study was an interview with one of the guards in like the 2010s where he recalled that the experiment was more an opportunity for him and the other guards to be large and in charge than it was anything with particular direction or super specific goals. They basically set up a self-fulfilling prophecy: if we encourage, provide opportunity and motive to, and compensate these particular young, white, male university students to be abusive will they be abusive?
Oh, and they screened potential subjects specifically searching for certain personalities and behavior patterns
About Zimbardo experiment, there were also a lot of things that made the experiment not just unethical, but scientifically worthless. Conclusion was supposed to be that being a guard makes you abusive. But Zimbardo pressured guards to be harsh and only a handful of them turned abusive.
There were also a lot more things that made this experiment unethical, including people who wanted to get out of the experiment straight up being refused and kind of being brainwashed to feel like they were really imprisoned for some crime.
I'm a little curious why is it called the "monster" expiriment?
cause people who did the experiment were monsters? idk
makes sence
i think that falls under child abuse
+Godzilla204
To put it bluntly, they were orphans: nobody wanted them, nobody valued them. Is that effed up? Yes, but the brain likes to rationalize others pain when it would otherwise overwhelm you. What changed is that, since it is so much easier for information to go from person to person, and so much harder for things to be quiet, is that the people more responsive to such things were more likely to speak up and bring others to act.
I mean you do bring up a good point, but I feel that the experiment is a little insenative even if they are orphans.
i seriously cannot escape this man. was studying for a bio exam last week watching him on crash course now im trying to relax and he's narrating this?! im not mad though
I watched this in psychology class the other day. Keep up the good work you guys!
Watson intended to decondition Albert, but was unable to do so after Albert was adopted.
As for the Stanford Prison experiment, Zimbardo is the reason the conditions went downhill so quickly. He wasn't getting the initial results he wanted, so he had a few "prisoners" and "guards" cause problems. Rather than showing the internalization of roles, it showed conformity to the will of someone in a leadership role.
As a person who is a lab coat wearing student, I'd turn around and be like "You're an idiot, bye." if they said "Shock this human with 450 volts."
I'm so glad you have ethics 💜
There were interviews after the Millgram experiment and the volunteers said the reason that the continued was because they thought it was important for science than a little pain and they were told multiple times that the shocks were not fatal.
I know that voice!! Haaaaank. 'There's a Hank for that' literally got me through my science a levels and first year of my degree lol
thank you this was very helpful for my learning!!1!!111!111!
I used to participate in paid psychology experiments at Princeton University for many years. It was great. They paid $12 per hour to do small studies, which were usually little games or test that you do on a computer. They'd pay $20 for fMRI scans or eeg. They also had one researcher who was studying muscle memory and he had this machine with a lever underneath, that you pull to shoot dots at a target on the screen. It was like an old Pac Man arcade game. It was a lot of fun. But unfortunately, I haven't had a chance to go back since they shut down the campus during the pandemic and they're not doing much of anything now. I miss doing it and I hope to be able to get back there soon. If you're in high school or college, it's a great way to make extra money on the side and you should look into it.
How about 5 highly unethical human experiments that would be damn illegal to perform, but could possibly give us some valuable information?
This would be cool, no one has done this yet.
This is actually really common with concentration camps back in WW2. In particular, Unit 737 was especially notorious for this, but the leader was actually given immunity from prosecution for his crimes in exchange for the research information. This is real I swear to god
Mixa Almost all human experiments, if conducted properly, have the chance of giving us useful information. It's pointless to do if people will be seriously harmed in the process or it's done without their informed consent.
It's why I always think how new medical facts often are known by chances be totally unintended/accidental but notice how the outcome then could be worth anything - As penicillin was the result of such insanitary 'lab' where now, not going to be possible in the sanitary experiments like today, yet how great medical now hero named in his science by essentially.. grown fungal in mould reduce but sanitation of the chance that science labs let fungus grow are little or none and essentially brain information we are clueless unless by horrific accidents/medical wrongdoing - for ethical good be save epileptic seizures which were life consuming by known surgical snipping of brain pieces result by moral intent be for good but as a consequence this individual lost his life in terms snipped into parts necessary for memory and essentially he lost his ability to forever form memory again - great knowing but knowing was again ethically by now, not a chance, or be it only by some fluke survival after brain areas are wiped from a still living person, as we study so much but all cases are where medically there has been some horror, loss to life, accidental or pure chance new find huge discoveries, and not to discredit how appreciated the research is by all in the sciences are because without people like them, we would not be anywhere like as advanced we are, but in how vast the benefits from anything but what is unethical, illegal, immoral or worse possible accident naturally, its' how we essentially get the knowledge, dilemma of which no real possible outcome be all fair, so understanding how we got certain things especially in sacrifice of lives before us, I have nothing but gratitude to those never knowing what value they had and never had a life, hope they found peace after what may have been living hell for so many.
the forbidden experiment or language deprivation experiments
I have to wonder if the bystander effect is actually a distraction effect. The presence of lots of people engaged in a conversation can hold someone's attention.
I experienced the bystander effect but as the real victim. I got in a bad car accident caused by someone illegally swerving into my lane. As I was able to avoid all collisions, I was the only person really effected, having swerved off into a ditch; the car damaged but no serious damage to me. I'm in my 30's and I've been in a few accidents so I knew the process, I was in shock, I calmed my breathing, put my hazards on and waited to safely exit my vehicle as it had swerved completely away from the busy traffic. Not a single person stopped, including the person who caused me to crash off the side of the road. No one stopped, everyone assumed someone else would stop and I was stuck completely alone. Soon I was in shock simply by how disgusted I was with the driver who caused the accident and everyone who just left me. It's creepy and disheartening.
Can you do one on cerebral aneurysms? I had one rupture at 19 and would love to learn more!
a what? That sounds like you are supposed to be dead now.
No people do survive them sometimes if they get medical help quickly enough. But even then they can be pretty damaging. Definitely not something you want to have happen to you.
I think they'd have to do one on aneurysms in general. Cerebral aneurysms are a bit too specific.
+
A weak spot in an artery in your brain ruptured, initiating a pulsating torrent of blood flooding immediate areas of the brain. A critical medical emergency, the blood flow must be stopped ASAP, generally via surgical clipping of the affected artery. Such weaknesses in artery walls are often genetic.
Post-aneurysm outcomes vary, and are dependent on a number of factors, including the area of brain affected, the size of the bleed, duration before intervention, and the patient's age.
~Kaycee, CNRN, CRRN
the stanford prison experiment was unethical, but it did teach an important lesson, those who have power will always abuse it
My BNursing class in Sydney watched this in a lecture about Evidence Based Practice; the reach of your content is phenomenal; it's hope giving in a way, to see educational content make it so far around the globe and into so many lives.
I like that apparently there needs to be a scientific report for these people to finally conclude that ruining a bunch of orphans self-esteem on purpose and never telling them about the fact it wasn't actually about them as a person is 'unethical'
Just started the video, my bets are on Little Albert, Milgram's shock experiment, and the Stanford Prison Experiment being on the list.
Right on all three counts. Thank you, GCSE psychology.
These are brutal.
+
+
+Peter Rabitt
I know, Bugs Bunny however... What's up, doc? Oh, I think you know exactly 'what's up'.
Look up the Tuskegee syphilis experiment. That one is even worse.
Tori Holbrook
Morality doesn't evolve as quickly as science. The catch up between the two is horrendous.
there is a decent dramatization of the Stanford Prison Experiment currently on Netflix if anyone is interested it's just called the Stanford Prison Experiment and is still available as of July 2017
I have read about each of these experiments prior to this video. Thank you for sharing this.
I think the Stanford Prison Experiment tells us a lot about why police misconduct is so common in the US.
"Now he fears even Santa Claus."
I had to watch this for an assignment in my psychology course. All five of these are both horrifying and terribly fascinating. Choosing just one to take a closer look at will be difficult.
I remember a time a homeless person collapsed and every student I was with scattered and ran in the opposite direction while I was the only one to run over to make sure he was ok. The bystander effect is very real but I don't understand it at all. It just confuses me. I think because I have so much anxiety normally situations like that don't really scare me much more than my baseline.
I don't understand how the milgram experiment is unethical, nobody got hurt and all the teachers were informed after the experiment that the student was ok by the student himself
You said the word yourself, AFTER. It's not ok to get consent from someone to do a test if they don't know what they're getting into. It's tricking people into a test, and that's not allowed.
It also might have caused damage to the subjects for life, might not have, but it still shouldn't have been done.
But if you told the subject, then the whole test would be ruined wouldn't it?
+Neph Drummond they were never forced to do anything and if they knew what was going on the experiment wouldn't work. Also any thought that they killed somebody was swept away by them meeting with the person they electrocuted and telling them the whole experiment
I think it was because the subjects thought that they killed the person which would be horrifying
all experiments were taught in my course and i feel so proud learning about them. xd
This guy is the reason I subbed. The way he reads his script is entertaining.
Thanks random speaking guy.
My professor linked this in one of her lectures. It made me smile.
I wish I had seen this before having to take the CITI training for my job. We had to read the freakin' Belmont Report about three times!
I wouldn't consider #3 and #4 to be unethical. The only "harm" seems to be that some subjects realized that they were not the greatest humans like they thought they were.
It's unethical to not obtain informed consent.
Are you fucking kidding me?! You're a piece of shit.
Wait, who is? The original poster? How is that? Showing people that they're not superman is a great thing
The Angledsaxon Making kids feel uncomfortable about themselves is awful.
Seriously? You're excusing people not helping others when their lives are in danger? What does that have to do with being "the greatest humans"? Where the hell did you get that from?
The little Albert experiment honestly seems almost a little funny to me, as well as being slightly horrifying, because my parents accidentally did sort of the same thing to me when I was a baby. They got me a mobile that played a music box version of "Somewhere Over The Rainbow" and they'd play it when they put me down to go to sleep and left. I did not like being left behind, and clearly associated the music with the upset that I am reported to have loudly expressed every night. The practical upshot of all of this is that hearing a music box version of "Somewhere Over The Rainbow" made me cry until I semi-accidentally deprogrammed myself when I was 13 by making myself cry too often because... teenage angst I think?
Thanks. This video really hit home when you were talking about the speech impediments and I realized that you have a severe one, yourself.