Peer rewiev
Was Stanley Milgram’s Study of Obedience Unethical?
I believe Milligram's study of obedience was unethical. Not onlywas it deceptive, the participants were pressured to continue andmany of the teachers were under a great deal of stress because ofit. I know that the experiment was on obedience but the BPS statesthat researchers are responsible to fully inform participants oftheir right to withdraw from the experiment at any time. Theparticipants were allowed to withdraw, but they were under a greatdeal of pressure to continue even when they didn't want to.Deception is lying, and it is always better to be truthful. Liesare lies no matter what the intention, and they are still wrong. Mybiggest reasoning, however, is the stress the experiment caused onthose participants. They had no idea they that there was not anyharm coming to the person they were shocking. \"Many of theparticipants were visibly stressed. Signs of tension includedtrembling, sweating, stuttering, laughing nervously, biting lipsand digging fingernails into palms of hands. Three participants haduncontrollable seizures, and many pleaded to be allowed to stop theexperiment.\" (McLeod, S.A., 2007.www.simplypsychology.org/miligram.html) Miligram claimed thatafterwards the majority were glad they had participated in theexperiment, but there was still too much stress on them. If one ofthem had unknowingly had heart issues they could have had a strokeor heart attack from the strain. This is why I believe his studywas unethical.
