In need of a short reply to classmates discussion post.

Classmates Reply:

Stanford Prison Experiment

Based off my experience from The Journal of Aggression, Conflict and Peace Research "Who will act badly in toxic situations?" the study and examination process are a crucial aspect to consider in advancing our interpretations and the deterrence of toxic and even suicidal behavior, and to improve its effect on humanity. While no one will question the usefulness of research in this field, designing and conducting suicide related studies entails ethical issues, many of which are not straightforward to address (Hom et al., 2017; Nugent et al., 2019). This editorial provides us with details about the tensions between researchers and research ethic committees and those which receive concerns about participant safety regarding the inclusion of those who are considered at risk of mistreatment or suicide and the perceptions that this may create that can lead to conflict of interest. Some may feel as though research with human participants has no valuable insight or advantage when leading to behavior and social medical sciences because theses studies are strictly regulated with laws at the federal, state, and local levels. There are guidelines set in place to ensure that the rights and welfare of the studied participants are protected. Because psychologists' scientific and professional judgments and actions may affect the lives of others, there are many factors in place to minimize harm and reflect a responsible work ethic.

Individual differences were examined and shown to exist in reactions to toxic situations, reviewing historical examples of massacres. The social psychological research on the question consists of the famous Milgram experiment on compliance and the Stanford Prison Experiment. These revisions display the authority of conditions in provoking violence to targets and at the same time they bypass an important part of practical actions, the origination of ingenious brutal systems that go outside the guidelines specified. Stanley Milligram's experiment is a classic yet controversial series in which examined the extent and willingness of human's to obey orders from an authoritative figure where the suggested research showed that situational variables have a sturdier influence than personality factors in determining obedience, and some psychologists would beg to differ in arguing both external and internal factors play a major role and that obedience in itself was not inevitable.

I feel as though this study is unethical for several reasons, first, the participants were led to believe that they could trust the authority figure, next they thought the cause was for good reasoning of scientific research and lastly, the thought the researcher would take full responsibility. Milligram wanted to investigate whether Germans were mostly obedient to authority figures as was the common elucidation for the Nazi killings in World War II. It was also believed to further understand cognitive process in memory and learning, in particular the effects of punishment on learning. This experiment was to see how much electroshock the teacher would give as punishment, when otherwise told it was part of an experiment. There were no electroshocks given, but the volunteer believed he was administering them. This experiment was clearly unethical to the point where slight heart conditions were made known and the study was continued.