Ethical Issues In Psychological Experiments: A Re-Evaluation

Ethical Issues in Psychological Experiments: A Re-evaluation in Applied Behavior Analysis

Understanding and adhering to ethical guidelines is critical to client care in psychology, especially when designing and conducting research. Historically, many influential experiments in psychology have violated contemporary ethical standards, often leading to harm or distress among participants. This paper explores one such influential experiment, analyzes the specific ethical violations based on the American Psychological Association’s (2002) Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct, and discusses how these violations could have been harmful. Furthermore, it presents a re-designed, ethically sound study to investigate the same hypothesis within current ethical frameworks, particularly emphasizing principles relevant to Applied Behavior Analysis (ABA).

Introduction

Psychology’s evolution has been marked by groundbreaking studies that have expanded our understanding of human behavior. However, this progress has occasionally come at the expense of participants’ rights and well-being. Ethical guidelines serve to protect participants and uphold the integrity of research. The infamous Stanford prison experiment conducted by Philip Zimbardo exemplifies a historical study that infringed upon these ethical standards, leading to significant psychological distress among participants. Analyzing this study through the lens of contemporary ethical guidelines reveals important lessons in safeguarding human subjects, especially as applied to ABA research, where participant welfare and ethical rigor are paramount.

The Study: The Stanford Prison Experiment

In 1971, Philip Zimbardo and colleagues conducted the Stanford prison experiment to investigate the psychological effects of perceived power within a simulated prison environment. College students were randomly assigned roles as guards or prisoners and placed in a mock prison setting. The study, initially planned to last two weeks, was terminated after only six days due to extreme behavioral reactions, including emotional breakdowns, humiliation, and psychological abuse. The guards exhibited authoritarian and abusive behaviors, while prisoners experienced severe stress and emotional distress. Although the experiment provided valuable insights into authority and conformity, it raised profound ethical concerns regarding the treatment, informed consent, and well-being of participants.

Ethical Violations in the Stanford Prison Experiment

Violation of Informed Consent

According to the APA Ethical Principles, informed consent requires that participants be fully aware of the nature of the study, potential risks, and their right to withdraw without penalty. In the Stanford prison experiment, participants were not adequately informed about the extent of psychological stress they could endure or the potential for maltreatment. The study’s design obscured the severity of the conditions, leading participants to underestimate or overlook the risks, which violates the principle of informed consent (American Psychological Association, 2002).

Failure to Protect Participants from Harm

The APA’s Standard 3.04 emphasizes minimizing harm and ensuring participant well-being during research. The Stanford prison experiment rapidly escalated into psychological and emotional abuse, with guards engaging in degrading behaviors and prisoners experiencing anxiety, depression, and emotional breakdowns. The lack of timely intervention or withdrawal options created an environment in which participants suffered severe distress, representing a significant breach of this guideline (American Psychological Association, 2002).

Potential Harm to Participants

The psychological impact on participants was profound, with reports of distress, anxiety, and feelings of helplessness. Some prisoners experienced lasting trauma, and even after the experiment, some reported difficulty distinguishing simulation from reality. The guards, too, exhibited abusive tendencies that could have had lasting effects. The ethical violations not only caused immediate emotional harm but also posed risks of long-term psychological consequences, underscoring the importance of adherence to ethical standards to prevent such harm.

Re-Designing an Ethical Study in Applied Behavior Analysis

Revised Study Purpose and Design

To ethically investigate the impact of authority figures on behavior, a revised study could utilize a structured ABA framework emphasizing participant safety. For example, a study could explore how reinforcement and sanctions influence compliance in a classroom setting, with clear behavioral goals, positive reinforcement, and safeguards against psychological discomfort. Participants, including children or individuals with developmental disabilities, would be fully informed about the procedures, risks, and their right to withdraw at any point. Consent would be obtained from guardians when necessary.

Addressing Ethical Guidelines

In the revised study, informed consent is prioritized by providing comprehensive information about procedures and potential risks. The study design incorporates continuous monitoring by an ethical oversight board to detect signs of distress promptly. Environmental modifications, scheduled breaks, and debriefing sessions ensure participant well-being. The focus on positive reinforcement aligns with ABA principles, promoting behavior change without psychological harm. Moreover, safeguards like participant withdrawal options and post-study support mitigate potential adverse effects, aligning with Standard 3.04 and the ABA Code of Conduct.

Conclusion

The Stanford prison experiment serves as a stark reminder of the catastrophic consequences of neglecting ethical standards in psychological research. Today’s ethical guidelines, rooted in the APA’s Principles and ABA codes, emphasize the importance of informed consent, participant welfare, and harm minimization. Redeveloping experiments within these frameworks ensures scientific inquiry continues responsibly, safeguarding the dignity and rights of participants. Integrating ethical principles into research design not only protects individuals but also preserves the integrity and credibility of psychological science, particularly within applied disciplines like ABA.

References

• American Psychological Association. (2002). Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct. Retrieved from https://www.apa.org/ethics/code
• Behavior Analyst Certification Board. (2020). BACB Guidelines for Responsible Conduct for Behavior Analysts. Retrieved from https://www.bacb.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/Guidelines-for-Responsible-Conduct.pdf
• Mental Floss. (2012). 10 famous psychological experiments that could never happen today. Retrieved from https://www.mentalfloss.com/article/32065/10-famous-psychological-experiments-could-never-happen-today
• Reicher, S., & Haslam, S. A. (2006). Simulation or participation? Safety, realism, and ethical issues in the Stanford prison experiment. Journal of Social Issues, 62(4), 555-569.
• Haslam, S. A., & Reicher, S. (2012). Contesting the 'nature' of conformity: What Milgram and Zimbardo's studies really show. PLoS Biology, 10(11), e1001426.
• Corey, G., Corey, M. S., & Callanan, P. (2014). Issues and Ethics in the Helping Professions. Cengage Learning.
• Bailey, J. S., & Burch, M. R. (2019). Ethics for Behavior Analysts. Routledge.
• Zimmerman, B. J. (2017). Ethics and research: Ensuring participant safety in psychological studies. Psychology Today.
• Schunk, D. H., & DiBenedetto, M. K. (2020). Ethical considerations in applied behavior analysis research. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 13(2), 214-221.
• Schlinger, H. D. (2019). Defining Behavior and Ethical Conduct in ABA. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis.