Man and the characteristics of his personality have been the object of interest and study of the great minds of mankind for centuries. And from the very beginning of the development of psychological science to the present day, people have been able to develop and significantly improve their skills in this difficult but exciting matter. Therefore, now, in order to obtain reliable data in the study of the characteristics of the human psyche and his personality, people use a large number of different methods and methods of research in psychology. And one of the methods that has gained the greatest popularity and has proven itself from the most practical side is a psychological experiment.
We decided to consider individual examples of the most famous, interesting and even inhumane and shocking socio-psychological experiments that were carried out on people, regardless of the general material, due to their importance and significance. But at the beginning of this part of our course, we will once again remember what a psychological experiment is and what its features are, and we will also briefly touch on the types and characteristics of the experiment.
What is an experiment?
Experiment in psychology- this is a certain experiment that is carried out in special conditions with the aim of obtaining psychological data through the intervention of the researcher in the process of the subject’s activity. Both a specialist scientist and a simple layman can act as a researcher during an experiment.
The main characteristics and features of the experiment are:
- The ability to change any variable and create new conditions to identify new patterns;
- Possibility to choose a starting point;
- Possibility of repeated implementation;
- The ability to include other methods of psychological research in the experiment: test, survey, observation and others.
The experiment itself can be of several types: laboratory, natural, pilot, explicit, hidden, etc.
If you have not studied the first lessons of our course, then you will probably be interested to know that you can learn more about experiments and other research methods in psychology in our lesson “Methods of Psychology.” Now we move on to consider the most famous psychological experiments.
The most famous psychological experiments
Hawthorne experiment
The name Hawthorne experiment refers to a series of socio-psychological experiments that were conducted from 1924 to 1932 in the American city of Hawthorne at the Western Electrics factory by a group of researchers led by psychologist Elton Mayo. The prerequisite for the experiment was a decrease in labor productivity among factory workers. Studies that have been conducted on this issue have not been able to explain the reasons for this decline. Because The factory management was interested in increasing productivity; the scientists were given complete freedom of action. Their goal was to identify the relationship between physical working conditions and worker performance.
After much research, scientists came to the conclusion that labor productivity is influenced by social conditions and, mainly, by the emergence of workers’ interest in the work process, as a consequence of their awareness of their participation in the experiment. The mere fact that workers are allocated to a separate group and special attention from scientists and managers is shown to them already affects the effectiveness of workers. By the way, during the Hawthorne experiment, the Hawthorne effect was revealed, and the experiment itself increased the authority of psychological research as scientific methods.
Knowing about the results of the Hawthorne experiment, as well as the effect, we can apply this knowledge in practice, namely, have a positive impact on our activities and the activities of other people. Parents can improve their children's development, teachers can improve student achievement, and employers can improve their employees' performance and productivity. To do this, you can try to announce that some kind of experiment will be taking place, and the people to whom you are announcing this are an important component of it. For the same purpose, you can apply the introduction of any innovations. But you can learn more about this here.
And you can find out the details of the Hawthorne experiment.
Milgram experiment
The Milgram experiment was first described by an American social psychologist in 1963. His goal was to find out how much suffering some people can cause to others, and innocent people, provided that this is their job responsibilities. Participants in the experiment were told that the effect of pain on memory was being studied. And the participants were the experimenter himself, a real subject (“teacher”), and an actor who played the role of another subject (“student”). The “student” had to memorize words from the list, and the “teacher” had to test his memory and, in case of an error, punish him with an electric shock, each time increasing its strength.
Initially, the Milgram experiment was conducted to find out how the inhabitants of Germany could take part in the destruction of huge numbers of people during the Nazi terror. As a result, the experiment clearly demonstrated the inability of people (in this case, “teachers”) to resist a boss (researcher) who ordered the “work” to continue, despite the fact that the “student” was suffering. As a result of the experiment, it was revealed that the need to obey authorities is deeply rooted in the human mind, even under conditions of internal conflict and moral suffering. Milgram himself noted that under the pressure of authority, adequate adults are capable of going very far.
If we think about it for a while, we will see that, in fact, the results of Milgram's experiment tell us, among other things, about the inability of a person to independently decide what to do and how to behave when someone is “above him” higher in rank, status, etc. The manifestation of these features of the human psyche, unfortunately, very often leads to disastrous results. In order for our society to be called truly civilized, people must learn to always be guided by human attitudes towards each other, as well as by ethical standards and moral principles that their conscience dictates to them, and not the authority and power of other people.
You can familiarize yourself with the details of Milgram's experiment.
Stanford prison experiment
The Stanford Prison Experiment was conducted by American psychologist Philip Zimbardo in 1971 at Stanford. It examined a person’s reaction to the conditions of imprisonment, restriction of freedom and the influence of an imposed social role on his behavior. Funding was provided by the US Navy to explain the causes of conflict in the Marine Corps and Navy correctional facilities. Men were selected for the experiment, some of whom became “prisoners”, and the other part became “guards”.
The “guards” and “prisoners” very quickly got used to their roles, and sometimes very dangerous situations arose in the makeshift prison. A third of the “guards” showed sadistic tendencies, and the “prisoners” received severe moral trauma. The experiment, designed to last two weeks, was stopped after just six days, because... it started to get out of control. The Stanford prison experiment is often compared to the Milgram experiment described above.
In real life, you can see how any justifying ideology supported by the state and society can make people overly susceptible and submissive, and the power of authorities has a strong impact on the personality and psyche of a person. Observe yourself and you will see clear evidence of how certain conditions and situations influence your internal state and shape your behavior more strongly than the internal characteristics of your personality. It is very important to be able to always remain yourself and remember your values in order not to be influenced by external factors. And this can only be done with the help of constant self-control and awareness, which, in turn, require regular and systematic training.
Details of the Stanford Prison Experiment can be found by following this link.
Ringelmann experiment
The Ringelmann experiment (also known as the Ringelmann effect) was first described in 1913 and conducted in 1927 by French professor of agricultural engineering Maximilian Ringelmann. This experiment was carried out out of curiosity, but revealed a pattern of reduction in people's productivity depending on the increase in the number of people in the group in which they work. For the experiment, a random selection of different numbers of people was carried out to perform a certain job. In the first case it was weight lifting, and in the second it was tug of war.
One person could lift a maximum weight of, for example, 50 kg. Therefore, two people should have been able to lift 100 kg, because... the result should increase in direct proportion. But the effect was different: two people were able to lift only 93% of the weight that they could lift 100% of individually. When the group of people was increased to eight people, they only lifted 49% of the weight. In the case of tug of war, the effect was the same: increasing the number of people reduced the percentage of efficiency.
We can conclude that when we rely only on our own strengths, we make maximum efforts to achieve results, and when we work in a group, we often rely on someone else. The problem lies in the passivity of actions, and this passivity is more social than physical. Solitary work gives us the reflex to achieve the maximum from ourselves, but in group work the result is not so significant. Therefore, if you need to do something very important, then it is best to rely only on yourself and not count on the help of other people, because then you will give it your all and achieve your goal, and what is important to other people is not so important to you.
More information about the Ringelmann experiment/effect can be found.
Experiment “Me and Others”
“Me and Others” is a 1971 Soviet popular science film that features filming of several psychological experiments, the progress of which is commented on by a narrator. The experiments in the film reflect the influence of the opinions of others on a person and his ability to think out what he was unable to remember. All experiments were prepared and conducted by psychologist Valeria Mukhina.
Experiments shown in the film:
- “Assault”: subjects must describe the details of an impromptu attack and recall the characteristics of the attackers.
- “Scientist or Murderer”: subjects are shown a portrait of the same person, having previously imagined him as a scientist or a murderer. Participants must create a psychological portrait of this person.
- “Both white”: a black and a white pyramid are placed on the table in front of the child participants. Three of the children say that both pyramids are white, testing the fourth for suggestibility. The results of the experiment are very interesting. Later, this experiment was carried out with the participation of adults.
- “Sweet salty porridge”: three quarters of the porridge in the plate is sweet, and one quarter is salty. Three children are given porridge and they say it is sweet. The fourth is given a salty “plot”. Task: check what a child who has tried the salty “plot” will name the porridge when the other three say it is sweet, thereby checking the importance of public opinion.
- “Portraits”: participants are shown 5 portraits and asked to find out if there are two photos of the same person among them. At the same time, all participants, except one who came later, must say that two different photos are photos of the same person. The essence of the experiment is also to find out how the opinion of the majority influences the opinion of one.
- “Shooting Range”: in front of the student there are two targets. If he shoots on the left, then a ruble will fall out, which he can take for himself, if on the right, then the ruble will go to the needs of the class. More hit marks were initially made on the left target. You need to find out which target the student will shoot at if he sees that many of his comrades were shooting at the left target.
The vast majority of the results from the experiments in the film showed that people (children and adults alike) care deeply about what others say and their opinions. It’s the same in life: very often we give up our beliefs and opinions when we see that the opinions of others do not coincide with our own. That is, we can say that we are losing ourselves among the others. For this reason, many people do not achieve their goals, betray their dreams, and follow the lead of the public. You need to be able to maintain your individuality in any conditions and always think only with your own head. After all, first of all, it will serve you well.
By the way, in 2010 a remake of this film was made, in which the same experiments were presented. If you wish, you can find both of these films online.
"Monstrous" experiment
A monstrous experiment in its essence was conducted in 1939 in the USA by psychologist Wendell Johnson and his graduate student Mary Tudor in order to find out how susceptible children are to suggestion. 22 orphans from the city of Davenport were selected for the experiment. They were divided into two groups. Children from the first group were told how wonderful and correct they spoke, and were praised in every possible way. The other half of the children were convinced that their speech was full of shortcomings, and they were called pathetic stutterers.
The results of this monstrous experiment were also monstrous: the majority of children from the second group, who did not have any speech defects, began to develop and take root all the symptoms of stuttering, which persisted throughout their entire lives. The experiment itself was hidden from the public for a very long time so as not to damage Dr. Johnson’s reputation. Then, nevertheless, people learned about this experiment. Later, by the way, similar experiments were carried out by the Nazis on concentration camp prisoners.
Looking at the life of modern society, you are sometimes amazed at how parents raise their children these days. You can often see how they scold their children, insult them, call them names, and call them very unpleasant names. It is not surprising that young children grow up to be people with broken psyches and developmental disabilities. We need to understand that everything that we say to our children, and especially if we say it often, will eventually be reflected in their inner world and the development of their personality. We need to carefully monitor everything we say to our children, how we communicate with them, what kind of self-esteem we form and what values we instill. Only healthy upbringing and true parental love can make our sons and daughters adequate people, ready for adulthood and capable of becoming part of a normal and healthy society.
There is more detailed information about the “monstrous” experiment.
Project "Aversia"
This terrible project was carried out from 1970 to 1989 in the South African army under the “leadership” of Colonel Aubrey Levin. This was a secret program aimed at clearing the ranks of the South African army of persons of non-traditional sexual orientation. According to official data, about 1,000 people became “participants” in the experiment, although the exact number of victims is unknown. To achieve a “good” goal, scientists used a variety of means: from drugs and electroshock therapy to chemical castration and sex change operations.
The Aversia project failed: it was impossible to change the sexual orientation of military personnel. And the “approach” itself was not based on any scientific data about homosexuality and transsexuality. Many victims of this project were never able to rehabilitate themselves. Some committed suicide.
Of course, this project concerned only people of non-traditional sexual orientation. But if we talk about those who are different from the rest in general, then we can often see that society does not want to accept people “different” from the rest. Even the slightest manifestation of individuality can cause ridicule, hostility, misunderstanding and even aggression on the part of the majority of “normal” people. Each person is an individual, a person with his own characteristics and mental properties. The inner world of every person is a whole universe. We have no right to tell people how they should live, speak, dress, etc. We should not try to change them if their “wrongness,” of course, does not harm the life and health of others. We must accept everyone as they are, regardless of their gender, religion, political or even sexuality. Everyone has the right to be themselves.
More details about the Aversia project can be found at this link.
Landis experiments
Landis's experiments are also called "Spontaneous Facial Expressions and Compliance." A series of these experiments was conducted by psychologist Carini Landis in Minnesota in 1924. The purpose of the experiment was to identify general patterns of work of facial muscle groups that are responsible for the expression of emotions, as well as to search for facial expressions characteristic of these emotions. The participants in the experiments were Landis' students.
To more clearly display facial expressions, special lines were drawn on the subjects’ faces. After this, they were presented with something capable of causing strong emotional experiences. For disgust, students sniffed ammonia, for arousal they watched pornographic pictures, for pleasure they listened to music, etc. But the most widespread response was caused by the last experiment, in which the subjects had to cut off the head of a rat. And at first, many participants flatly refused to do this, but in the end they did it anyway. The results of the experiment did not reflect any pattern in the expressions of people's faces, but they showed how ready people are to obey the will of authorities and are able, under this pressure, to do things that they would never do under normal conditions.
It’s the same in life: when everything is great and turns out as it should, when everything goes as usual, then we feel like confident people, have our own opinion and maintain our individuality. But as soon as someone puts pressure on us, most of us immediately stop being ourselves. Landis's experiments once again proved that a person easily “bends” under others, ceases to be independent, responsible, reasonable, etc. In fact, no authority can force us to do what we do not want. Moreover, if this entails causing harm to other living beings. If every person is aware of this, then, quite possibly, this will be able to make our world much more humane and civilized, and life in it more comfortable and better.
You can learn more about Landis' experiments here.
Little Albert
An experiment called “Little Albert” or “Little Albert” was conducted in New York in 1920 by psychologist John Watson, who, by the way, is the founder of behaviorism, a special direction in psychology. The experiment was carried out in order to find out how fear is formed for objects that previously did not cause any fear.
For the experiment, they took a nine-month-old boy named Albert. For some time he was shown a white rat, a rabbit, cotton wool and other white objects. The boy played with the rat and got used to it. After this, when the boy began to play with the rat again, the doctor hit the metal with a hammer, causing very unpleasant sensations in the boy. After a certain period of time, Albert began to avoid contact with the rat, and even later at the sight of a rat, as well as cotton wool, a rabbit, etc. started crying. As a result of the experiment, it was suggested that fears are formed in a person at a very early age and then remain for the rest of his life. As for Albert, his unreasonable fear of the white rat remained with him for the rest of his life.
The results of the “Little Albert” experiment, firstly, again remind us of how important it is to pay attention to every little detail in the process of raising a child. Something that seems completely insignificant to us at first glance and is overlooked, can in some strange way be reflected in the child’s psyche and develop into some kind of phobia or fear. When raising children, parents must be extremely attentive and observe everything that surrounds them and how they react to it. Secondly, thanks to what we now know, we can identify, understand and work through some of our fears for which we cannot find the cause. It is quite possible that what we are unreasonably afraid of came to us from our own childhood. How nice can it be to get rid of some fears that tormented or simply bothered you in everyday life?!
You can learn more about the Little Albert experiment here.
Acquired (learned) helplessness
Acquired helplessness is a mental state in which an individual does absolutely nothing to somehow improve his situation, even having such an opportunity. This condition appears mainly after several unsuccessful attempts to influence the negative influences of the environment. As a result, the person refuses any action to change or avoid the harmful environment; the feeling of freedom and faith in one’s own strength is lost; depression and apathy appear.
This phenomenon was first discovered in 1966 by two psychologists: Martin Seligman and Steve Mayer. They conducted an experiment on dogs. The dogs were divided into three groups. The dogs from the first group stayed in cages for a while and were released. Dogs in the second group were given small shocks, but were given the opportunity to turn off the electricity by pressing a lever with their paws. The third group was subjected to the same electric shocks, but without the ability to turn it off. After some time, the dogs from the third group were placed in a special enclosure, from where they could easily get out by simply jumping over the wall. In this enclosure, the dogs were also subjected to electric shocks, but they continued to remain in place. This told scientists that the dogs had developed “learned helplessness”; they began to believe that they were helpless in the face of the outside world. Afterwards, scientists concluded that the human psyche behaves in a similar way after several failures. But was it worth subjecting dogs to torture in order to find out what, in principle, we all have known for so long?
Probably, many of us can remember examples of confirmation of what scientists proved in the above-mentioned experiment. Every person in life can have a streak of failures when it seems that everything and everyone is against you. These are moments when you give up, you want to give up everything, stop wanting something better for yourself and your loved ones. Here you need to be strong, show fortitude and fortitude. It is these moments that temper us and make us stronger. Some people say that this is how life tests your strength. And if you pass this test steadfastly and with your head held high, then luck will be favorable. But even if you don’t believe in such things, just remember that it’s not always good or always bad, because... one always replaces the other. Never lower your head and don’t give up on your dreams; as they say, they won’t forgive you for this. In difficult moments of life, remember that there is a way out of any situation and you can always “jump over the wall of the enclosure,” and the darkest hour is before the dawn.
You can read more information about what acquired helplessness is and about experiments related to this concept.
Boy raised like a girl
This experiment is one of the most inhumane in history. It, so to speak, was held from 1965 to 2004 in Baltimore (USA). In 1965, a boy named Bruce Reimer was born there, whose penis was damaged by doctors during a circumcision procedure. The parents, not knowing what to do, turned to psychologist John Money and he “recommended” that they simply change the gender of the boy and raise him as a girl. The parents followed the “advice”, gave permission for gender reassignment surgery and began raising Bruce as Brenda. In fact, Dr. Money has long wanted to conduct an experiment to prove that gender is determined by upbringing and not by nature. The boy Bruce became his test subject.
Despite the fact that Mani noted in his reports that the child was growing up as a full-fledged girl, parents and school teachers argued that, on the contrary, the child exhibited all the character traits of a boy. Both the child’s parents and the child themselves experienced extreme stress for many years. A few years later, Bruce-Brenda decided to become a man: he changed his name and became David, changed his image and had several operations to “return” to male physiology. He even married and adopted his wife's children. But in 2004, after breaking up with his wife, David committed suicide. He was 38 years old.
What can be said about this “experiment” in relation to our everyday life? Probably, only that a person is born with a certain set of qualities and predispositions determined by genetic information. Fortunately, not many people try to make daughters out of their sons or vice versa. But, nevertheless, when raising their child, some parents do not seem to want to notice the characteristics of their child’s character and his developing personality. They want to “sculpt” the child, as if from plasticine - to make him the way they themselves want him to be, without taking into account his individuality. And this is unfortunate, because... It is precisely because of this that many people in adulthood feel unfulfilled, frailty and meaninglessness of existence, and do not receive pleasure from life. The small is confirmed in the big, and any influence we have on our children will be reflected in their future lives. Therefore, you should be more attentive to your children and understand that every person, even the smallest one, has his own path and we must try with all our might to help him find it.
And some details of the life of David Reimer himself can be found at this link.
The experiments we reviewed in this article, as you might guess, represent only a small part of the total number ever conducted. But even they show us, on the one hand, how multifaceted and little studied the human personality and psyche are. And, on the other hand, what a huge interest a person arouses in himself, and how much effort is made so that he can understand his nature. Despite the fact that such a noble goal was often achieved by far from noble means, one can only hope that a person has somehow succeeded in his endeavor, and experiments that are harmful to a living being will stop being carried out. We can say with confidence that it is possible and necessary to study the human psyche and personality for many more centuries, but this should be done only based on considerations of humanism and humanity.
Experiments on people are a complex and often unpredictable matter, even when it is not against the law. Nevertheless, this is often the only way - through social experiments - that it is possible to understand both the characteristics of human behavior and the specifics of historical events.
One of the most famous social experiments was conducted to explain conflicts in prisons. This is the famous Stanford experiment. At the request of the government, psychologist Philip Zimbardo recruited a group of 24 volunteers, who were randomly divided into two equal subgroups: guards and prisoners. It was assumed that during the study, people would live in conditions similar to prison, while psychologists would analyze changes in their behavior.
Almost immediately the situation got out of control. The guards began to show a tendency towards sadism, humiliated the prisoners, forced them to do meaningless physical exercises, deprived them of mattresses for disobedience, forced them to clean toilets, and turned showering into a privilege. At first the prisoners tried to resist, even starting a riot. Soon they began to exhibit various neuroses and mental disorders. Several people were even replaced due to a sharp deterioration in health. When one of the new arrivals went on a hunger strike to protest sadism, his neighbors considered it hooliganism and actively welcomed the actual torture by the guards. The experiment lasted only six days instead of two weeks.
In no time at all, people took on the roles of sadists and victims.
It is noteworthy that only one person clearly condemned what was happening and questioned the need for such tests. It was a graduate student and Zimbardo's fiancée who eventually achieved the early termination of the experiment.
Among the most terrible social experiments is the experience of Wendell Johnson from the University of Iowa. The participants in his study were orphans. 22 children were divided into two groups, which then underwent training. During the tests, some were constantly told that they were great, that they spoke well and correctly, and that they were doing an excellent job with everything. Others, on the contrary, were actively instilled with an inferiority complex. The study was focused on the nature of stuttering, so children were constantly called stutterers - with or without reason. Eventually, this group developed serious speech problems.
Because of the insults, even those children who spoke well began to stutter
Johnson's experiment resulted in health problems that remained with the subjects until the end of their days - some of them could not be cured. The university itself understood that such research was unacceptable. Until recently, information about Johnson’s work was kept secret.
Experiments on the influence of the majority on individuals are widely known, when a person finds himself among dummy actors and is ready, following the opinion of the group, to call a square a circle and red a white. But to what extent can a minority change the views of a group and are a few able to determine the opinion of the majority? Serge Moscovici was looking for answers to these questions. In one experiment, a group of 6 people were shown a series of cards and asked to name colors. Two dummy participants in the study always referred to green as blue. This led to the fact that 8 percent of the remaining answers were incorrect - representatives of the majority were influenced by a group of dissidents. Studies have shown that the ideas of the minority spread throughout the community increasingly, once you win over the first representative of the majority.
Muscovites have identified the most effective ways to change public opinion. Constant repetition of one thesis and confidence are certainly important. But it’s even better if the dissidents agree with the community on almost all points except one. Then the group will be ready to give in, and the minority will become the majority.
Most people are so obedient that they are even willing to commit murder under the guidance of authority. This was shown by the experiments that made American social psychologist Stanley Milgram famous. Three people took part in the trial. One of them is the leader of the experiment. The other two, according to legend, are test subjects. In fact, only one of them was an actual research subject, and he was paired with a professional actor.
In a rigged draw, the test taker was given the role of mentor, while the other person became the student and had to answer questions as in an exam. Under the direction of the leader of the experiment, the mentor punished for incorrect answers: he “activated” the electrodes connected to the actor. In fact, there was no electricity. The “student” only depicted different degrees of suffering from electric shocks and begged for mercy.
First 45 volts, then 60, then - by order of the head of the experiment - even more. When the actor yelled and demanded to stop the experiment, the sociologist insisted on continuing. At some point, the screams stopped coming from the next room - on the panel in front of the “mentor” there were 220 volts, 300... Knowing that the experiment partner was experiencing horrific torment, the subjects, under someone else’s guidance, increased the voltage level to 450.
Only a third were able to insist on their own and stop torturing another
The results were later confirmed by other similar studies. It was a shock - in the post-war years, Americans were presented with evidence that their neighbors could go kill people in concentration camps under the leadership of dubious authorities. Moreover, many participants in the experiments believed that the “student” was being punished according to his deserts.
Reflections on how the German people could support Nazism, around the same time, turned into an experiment in creating an organization with a totalitarian ideology. California school history teacher Ron Jones decided to explain in practice to tenth graders why Nazi ideology was so popular. These classes lasted only a week.
First, the teacher spoke about the power of discipline: he demanded that students sit quietly at their desks, enter and leave the classroom silently and at the first order. The schoolchildren began to get involved in this game with pleasure. Then there were lessons about the power of community: teenagers chanted the slogan “Strength in discipline, strength in community,” greeted each other with a special greeting, received membership cards and created symbols for an organization called “The Third Wave.” Finally, it came to the “power of action.” At this stage, new members were involved in the organization, and those responsible for searching for “slanderers” and dissidents appeared inside. Every day more and more people began to attend these classes.
Even the school principal greeted the scientist with a “Third Wave” salute.
On Thursday, the teacher told the students that they were participating in a national program and such organizations were being created in different states. In the future, according to this legend, young people would have to support a new presidential candidate. John announced a televised address at noon on Friday, when the mobilization of the “Third Wave” was supposed to be announced. At hour X, about 200 schoolchildren gathered in the classroom in front of the TV. Naturally, there was no appeal. It was explained to the students that this was an example of how easy it would be for Nazism to take root even in a democratic country. The teenagers left depressed, some with tears in their eyes. It is noteworthy that the general public became aware of Jones’ experiment only years later.
Why do people behave this way or that way. Psychologists have pondered this question since ancient times. Much of our current knowledge about the human mind is based on experiments conducted by psychologists in the last century.
1. Violinist in a metro station
So many people take a moment to stop and appreciate the beauty around them. According to a 2007 experiment, it's likely that almost no one does. World-renowned violinist Josh Bell busked in a Washington DC subway station for a day to see how many people would stop and listen to him play.
Even though he played a $3.5 million handmade violin and had just sold out his $100 concert in Boston, few people stopped to appreciate his beautiful playing. Bell ended up making a measly $32 for the entire day.
2. Little Albert
The Little Albert experiment is similar to Pavlov's dog experiment, but it was done on humans. This is probably one of the most unethical psychological studies of all time. In an experiment conducted in 1920, John B. Watson and his partner Rosalie Rayner at Johns Hopkins University tried to develop irrational fears in a nine-month-old boy. Watson first placed a white rat in front of the baby, who initially showed no fear.
He then began to hit the steel rod with a hammer, scaring the boy named Albert every time he touched the rat. After some time, the boy began to cry and show signs of fear every time the rat appeared in the room. Watson also developed similar conditioned reflexes with other animals and objects until Albert became afraid of them all.
3. Milgram experiment
An experiment conducted in 1961 by Yale University psychologist Stanley Milgram measured people's willingness to obey authority figures who ordered them to do actions that were contrary to the subjects' moral beliefs. Participants in the experiment were told that they had to role-play as a “teacher” and give an electric shock to a “student” who was supposedly in another room every time he answered a question incorrectly.
In fact, no one was shocked, but Milgram played a recording of screams to the “teacher” who pressed the button, making it appear as if the “student” was suffering from severe pain and wanted to end the experiment. Despite these protests, many participants continued the experiment because they were told to do so, constantly “increasing the tension” (so they thought) after each incorrect answer. Such experiments indicate that people are willing to go against their conscience if they are ordered to do so by their “boss.”
4. Marshmallow experiment
Could delayed gratification be an indicator of future success? This is exactly what Walter Mischel of Stanford University tried to determine in 1972. In what was called the "Marshmallow Experiment," children between the ages of four and six were placed in a room with marshmallows placed on a table in front of them. After this, the experimenter left the room for 15 minutes and said that the child would receive a second marshmallow if the first one was still on the table when he returned.
The examiner recorded how long each child resisted the temptation to eat the marshmallow and then noted whether this correlated with the child's learning success. A minority of the 600 children ate the marshmallow right away, most didn't wait 15 minutes, and only one third managed to delay the gratification long enough to get a second marshmallow.
In subsequent studies, Mischel found that those who were able to delay gratification scored higher in school than their peers, meaning that this characteristic likely remains with a person throughout life.
5. Bystander effect
In the event of an emergency (accident, crime, etc.), most people would probably want to be in a busy area because they would have a better chance of getting help there. Contrary to popular belief, just because there are a lot of people around does not guarantee anything.
A psychological phenomenon called the bystander effect suggests that people are more likely to help someone in trouble if there are no (or very few) other bystanders around. If there are a lot of people around, everyone will stand and stare, thinking that someone else should help.
6. Asch's experiment
The Asch experiment is another famous example of the temptation to conform to others in a situation where there are many people around. During this series of experiments conducted in the 1950s, the subject was placed in a room with other participants, who were all "decoys." They were shown one by one two cards, one of which showed one line, and the other three, and only one of them was the same length as the first card.
Subjects were asked to name which of these three lines coincided in length with the line on the first card. The “decoy ducks” all unanimously gave the same wrong answer. As a result, the subject also began to repeat after them, even though this answer was obviously incorrect. The results once again showed that people, as a rule, try to be “like everyone else” in a crowd.
7. Stanford Prison Experiment
The Stanford Prison Experiment is considered one of the most unethical psychological experiments of all time. It examined the psychological effects that prison conditions can have on human behavior. In 1971, an experimental model prison was built in the basement of the Stanford University psychology building.
Twenty-four male students were randomly selected to play the role of either a prisoner or a guard for two weeks. The students eventually became so accustomed to their role that they began to become aggressive.
8. Bobo doll experiment
During the 1960s, there was much debate about how genetics, environmental factors, and social learning influence children's development. In 1961, Albert Bandura conducted an experiment with a Bobo doll to prove that human behavior stems from social imitation rather than being determined by inherited genetic factors.
He created three groups of children: one where adults showed aggressive behavior towards a Bobo doll, another where an adult was shown playing with a Bobo doll, and the third group was a control group. The results showed that children who were exposed to the aggressive model were themselves more likely to exhibit aggressive behavior towards the doll, while the other groups did not demonstrate aggressive behavior.
9. Pavlov's Dog
The name of Academician Pavlov today is inextricably associated with dogs and bells. This famous experiment made the concept of a conditioned reflex widespread. Pavlov studied the rate of salivation in dogs when eating food.
He noticed that the dog began to salivate even at the sight of food, so he began ringing a bell every time he gave food to the dog. Over time, the dogs began to associate the ringing of the bell with food and began to salivate at the sound of the bell.
10. Piano ladder
Volkswagen's Pleasure Theory experiment proves that people's behavior can be changed for the better by making routine activities more fun. In a recent experiment, the company placed musical steps in the shape of piano keys on the stairs of a subway station in Stockholm to see if more people would choose the healthier option of taking regular stairs from the subway rather than an escalator. On the same day, 66 percent more people took the stairs than usual.
Experiment- a specific method based on the controlled interaction of the researcher with the object under study under predetermined conditions. In an experiment, information can be obtained in an artificially created environment, which distinguishes this method from ordinary observation.
A sociological experiment is fundamentally different from a natural science experiment. The peculiarity of the latter is that the object is the material world, explored using a certain device or instrument, i.e. the experimenter, in the words of G. Hegel, “acts against nature with the help of nature itself,” while a sociological experiment is a joint activity of subjects and a sociologist, aimed at studying any feature of an individual or group.
This method is used to test hypotheses regarding causal relationships between social phenomena. In this case, two complex phenomena are compared, differing in that in the first there is some hypothetical cause, and in the second it is absent. If, under the influence of the experimenter, a change is observed in the first, but not in the second, then the hypothesis is considered proven. Experimental research in sociology differs from the methods of other sciences in that the experimenter actively manipulates the independent variable. If in the application of non-experimental methods, as a rule, all groups are equal for the researcher, then the experiment usually involves main And control groups of subjects.
Due to the different levels of development of a particular scientific problem and the lack of information about the relationship between dependent and independent variables, two main types of experiments are distinguished:
- research, which is carried out when the causal relationship between the dependent and independent variables is unclear and the experiment is aimed at testing the hypothesis about the existence of a causal relationship between two phenomena;
- confirming, which is carried out if the connection is clarified in advance and a hypothesis is put forward about the content of the connection. Then in the experiment this connection is revealed and clarified.
Thus, when identifying the causes of social tension in a particular city, the following possible hypotheses are put forward: low incomes of the population, social polarization, unprofessionalism of the administration, corruption, negative influence of the media, etc. Each of them requires verification, although it seems quite reasonable.
The experimenter must have the necessary information on the problem being studied. After formulating the problem, the key concepts contained in the specialized scientific literature and sociological dictionaries are determined. When working with the literature, not only the problem is clarified, but also a research plan is drawn up, and new hypotheses arise. Next, the variables are defined in terms of the experimental procedure; First of all, external variables are identified that can significantly affect the dependent variable.
The selection of subjects must meet the requirement of representativeness, i.e. be carried out taking into account the characteristics of the general population, in other words, the composition of the experimental group should simulate this population, since the conclusions obtained as a result of the experiments extend to the population as a whole.
In addition, subjects should be assigned to experimental and control subgroups so that they are equivalent.
The researcher experimentally influences the first group, and there is no influence in the control group. As a result, the resulting difference can be attributed to the independent variable.
Suppose a researcher hypothesizes that in a given city, the influence of the media leads to an increase in social tension. But what is the cause and what is the effect? Perhaps social tension itself influences the nature of television broadcasts and the publication of “disturbing” articles in the local press. In this case, a sociologist can conduct an experiment to find out this cause-and-effect relationship.
So, for the experimental group, you can control (reduce or increase) the number of broadcasts with excessive “negative” information, change the influencing factors in order to find out how these factors separately or in combination influence people, i.e. the researcher manipulates one or two independent variables while trying to keep all others constant (Figure 1.3).
Rice. 1.3. The impact of the media on the growth of social tension
As objects sociological experiments are different - consumers and producers, managers and managed, believers and atheists, students and teachers, production and scientific teams, etc., and any characteristics of these groups are mainly psychological in nature. Therefore, experiments of this kind are often socio-psychological. Note that the main difference between purely psychological and sociological experiments is the emphasis of research programs and methods, as well as the goals set for the researcher. Thus, in a sociological experiment, specific manifestations of human behavior are studied, where psychological factors play a significant role. V. Birkenbill describes a nonverbal (wordless) conflict experiment, the participants of which were only two (small group).
This experiment was conducted at a restaurant table, at which two friends were sitting opposite each other. One of them, a psychiatrist, behaved somewhat unusually: he took a pack of cigarettes, lit a cigarette and, continuing to talk, put the pack next to his interlocutor’s plate. He felt somewhat uncomfortable, although he could not understand the reason. The feeling of discomfort intensified when the psychiatrist, pushing his plate towards the pack of cigarettes, leaned over the table and began to passionately prove something. Finally he took pity on his interlocutor and said:
I have just demonstrated, with the help of so-called body language, the main features of non-linguistic communication.
The amazed friend asked:
What are the main features?
I aggressively threatened you and through this influenced you. I brought you into a state where you could be defeated, and that bothered you.
But how? What did you do?
First, I moved my pack of cigarettes towards you,” he explained. — According to the unwritten law, the table is divided in half: one half of the table is mine, and the other is yours.
But I didn’t set any boundaries.
Of course not. But despite this, such a rule exists. Each of us mentally “labels” our part, and usually we “divide” the table according to this rule. However, by placing my pack of cigarettes on the other half, I violated this unwritten agreement. Although you were not aware of what was happening, you felt discomfort... Then came the next intrusion: I moved my plate towards you. Finally, my body followed suit as I hovered over your side... You felt more and more miserable, but you just didn’t understand why.
If you conduct such an experiment, make sure that first your interlocutor, still unconsciously, will push back the objects that you place in his area.
You move them towards him again, and he stubbornly pushes them back. This may continue until the person you are talking to realizes what is happening. Then he will go “on the warpath”, for example by aggressively declaring: “Stop it!”, or will pointedly and sharply throw these objects towards you.
More risky are attempts to study the causes and dynamics of violent conflict. The researcher can use stimulating or suppressive measures (independent variables), for example, if you influence a group of subjects, you can detect an increase or decrease in aggression by recording its various manifestations (screams, threats, etc.).
M.B. Harris and colleagues in the 1970s. conducted an ingenious experiment when subjects who found themselves in shops, supermarkets, restaurants, airports, etc., were subjected to direct and strong incitement to aggression. Several different procedures have been used for this purpose. For example, in one of the options, the experimenter's assistants deliberately pushed people from behind. The subjects' reactions to this unexpected act were classified into categories: polite, indifferent, somewhat aggressive (for example, a brief protest or glare) and very aggressive (long angry reprimands or a push back). In several other experiments, the experimenter's assistants stood in front of a person standing in line (in a store, restaurant, bank). In some cases the assistants said “sorry” and in others they said nothing at all. Verbal responses were classified as polite, indifferent, somewhat aggressive (brief remarks such as “here I stand”), and very aggressive (threats or swearing). Nonverbal reactions were classified as friendly (smiling), blank looks, hostile or threatening gestures, pushing, and pushing. These procedures have been used to study frustration and aggression.
Thus, under sociological experiment you should understand the method of collecting and analyzing data that allows you to test hypotheses about the presence or absence of causal relationships between social phenomena. To do this, the researcher actively intervenes in the natural course of events: creates artificial conditions in the group being studied and systematically controls them. The information obtained during the experiment about changes in the indicators of the object being studied helps to clarify, refute or confirm the initial research hypothesis. The experimental method allows one to obtain reliable results that can be successfully applied in practical activities, for example, to increase the efficiency of the functioning of social groups, organizations, and institutions. However, in the process of applying an experimental method, it is important to take into account not only the reliability of the data, but also moral and legal standards, as well as the interests and aspirations of the people participating in the study.
In the media you can often find the opinion that residents of developed countries are especially compassionate and attentive to their neighbors. The participants in this experiment decided to check whether this was actually true. In the frame there is a street of one of the world's largest capitals, winter cold and a freezing little tramp. Will there be any of the hurrying passers-by who will stop and help him?
2. Stealing from a beggar
In this video, the authors test random passers-by for honesty. To do this, they placed a sleeping beggar on one of the alleys of the park, and near him, on a cardboard, quite large bills. For most people, this made no difference and they continued tossing their coins. However, there were also those who wanted to steal money from the poor, so the social experiment ended in a real chase.
3. Rescue of a suicide
One of the most exciting stories on this list. It begins with a man in a terribly depressed mood getting into a taxi and starting to complain to the driver about his life. Driving along one of the bridges, he asks the driver to stop and gets out with the clear intention of committing suicide. The driver's reaction is amazing and touching to the point of tears.
4. Child in the car
What will happen to a small child if he is left in a locked car under the scorching rays of the sun? The answer is obvious. However, almost none of the people passing by took the time to save the baby from danger. In almost ten hours of the experiment, only two people decided to make a desperate attempt to break into someone else's car.
5. Have sex with a stranger
There is an opinion that a real man is always ready for love, especially if such a charming girl offers it. A reality check shatters this claim. Not all of the hundred guys surveyed in this experiment showed a willingness to immediately follow a stranger like that. The video is quite long, but at the end you will see the final score.
6. Violence on the street
Almost every person at least once in his life has found himself in a situation where he sees some kind of blatant injustice in front of him. At such moments, one half of him wants to intervene, while the other urges him to turn away and not look for unnecessary problems for himself. The authors of this video decided to check what decision the residents of the Swedish capital would make if several guys started beating a child in front of their eyes.
Of course, not all of the experiments presented above have scientific value and representative results. But they definitely make you think about modern society and human relationships. And this is the first step towards trying to become better, change your life and look at the people around you in a new way.