Three Famous Experiments
1. Robbers Cave Experiment
2. Blue Eye versus Brown Eyed Students
3. The Little Albert Experiment
1. What was the purpose of this experiment? What were the authors’ hypotheses (that is, what were they predicted would happen)?
Response for Experiment One:
The Robbers Cave Experiments is an experiment by Muzafer Sherif. The main motive for this experiment was to add onto his Realist Conflict Theory which holds those groups’ disagreements, stereotypes, and judgments are the end products of competition of resources (Danko, 2013). While testing the group dynamics when faced with a conflict, the researcher used preteen boys who were sponsored to a summer camp. According to the researcher, he believed that if he puts the boys in a competitive environment, negative behavior and prejudice could emerge. This is precisely what Sherif obtained from his experiment.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Response for Experiment Two:
The Blue Eye versus Brown Eyed Students experiment is a Jane Elliot experiment conducted when the U.S was experiencing segregation due to high rates of racism. Although she is not a psychologist, she developed a famous one of the most recognized controversial experiment where she grouped the learners into blue and brown eyes. The purpose of this experiment is to expose her learners to the real effects of discrimination and how it comes about. Elliot understood that discrimination starts at a tender age and since she was only teaching a completely white class, she was able to drive the point home and because the white were the ones who are to promote racism.
Response for Experiment Three:
The Albert Experiment was an experiment by John Hopkins done in 1920. It was a classical conditioning experiment where Elliot paired specific stimulus up to the time they produced the same answers. In essence in conditioning can create a response in animals towards a sound that that has been neutral. This experiment has been linked with the most recognized experiment of the dog’s test where the owner used a bell to alert the dog for meals. For Albert to get the right results, a nine-month kid was used in the experiment.
2. Was the deception used in this experiment? If so, what was the reason for using deception of subjects?
Response for Experiment One:
In the Robbers Cave Experiment, deception was utilized. When sampling the participants of this experiment, Sherif did not inform any of them o the purpose of the trip and later exposed them to an experiment. At the same time, the participants were not shielded from any form of danger, either physical or psychological, and it remained secret to the researcher all through. The other thing about the Robbers Cave Experiment is that its sample population was biased. It was only comprised of middle-class, young, white which could not be used to give a comprehensive representation of the entire population in the U.S. The researcher used deception in order to get his work done on time because if the sample knew of the intention of the experiment, it could have affected the nature of results obtained.
Response for Experiment Two:
In Elliott’s experiment, deception was used. Although she managed to repeat the experiment in 1969 and 1970, she did not seek consent from the original participants. The Blue Eyed versus Brown Eyed Students experiment was first done when America was on a transition, a time when Martin Luther King Jr. was murdered and if she could have revealed the nature of the exercise, the students could have altered their expression towards the issue of racism because of fear. To retain her experiment as life-changing, she had to play with the psychology of her students. Response for Experiment Three:
In the Little Albert Experiment, deception was used. Many people considered Watson’s experiment as a success, but many rules of conducting research were broken all through. There was no consent regarding the little child. The researcher decided to use deception to discover all the aspects of human psychology. The deception was also utilized to hire participants who knew to test memory and learning. At the age of nine months, a child had not known much. In this case, deception helped to demonstrate the pain an average human being feels when exposed to a stressful environment.
3. What methodology was used in the study (e.g., were subjects run through an experimental procedure or did the experimenters observe people in a naturalistic setting)? Why do you think this type of methodology was chosen?
Response for Experiment One:
The experimenter observed his participants in a naturalistic setting. From the first part of Sherif’s experiment, we are informed that a group of preteen boys was gathered and funded their summer camp, but the main agenda of this camp was unknown to the participants (Danko, 2013). There were no logical experiments done to the boys other than just grouping them and observing their behaviors. First, the boys were divided into two intricate and they were placed at different places. They have subjected to a highly competitive environment, where essential resources had been rationed. The essence of this method was chosen is because it provides instant results. When humans are exposed to limited resources, they are bound to compete and hence the making it the best method for the experiment.
Response for Experiment Two:
In the Blue Eye versus Brown Eyed Students, the Elliott just observed the behaviors and sentiments of her class in a naturalistic setting. She did not perform any laboratory experiment to complete her exercise. She only divided her class into main groups; the blue eye and the brown eye. In just a day, she noticed that the superior group (blue eye) became crueler while the inferior group turned out to be more insecure. She interchanged her first arrangement so that both groups could play the same role hence enduring the same prejudices. No other method could have worked better for Elliott particularly at that time if not this one. The technique was one of the greatest lessons because it makes people feel both sides of the coin.
Response for Experiment Three:
In Watson’s experiment, the subjects run were through an experimental procedure. This was one of the complicated experiments and required a sophisticated technique. Since Watson wanted to study the behavior of stimulus, he had to conduct a detailed experiment. Although at the age of nine months, Albert appears to be too young to be subjected to scary animals and loud voice. But as a way of accomplishing his research, Watson chose this methodology because, at the age of nine months, a child has started acknowledging his environment. This means that if the child begins developing phobia at that tender age, he is likely to suffer the rest of their life.
4. What were the results of the study? Were the experimenters’ predictions correct? If not, why did the experimenters feel that things turned out differently than expected?
Response for Experiment One:
From this experiment, Sherif found out that after rationing the resources, the victors started by demarcating their territories. This involved the use of threats such as keep off. Since they were boys, they were willing to fight each other to survive. If the conditions would have become sour, the two groups could become more violent than what was observed. This experiment then proved that Sherif’s Realistic Conflict Theory was valid; intergroup disagreement can cause prejudice and negative behavior.
Response for Experiment Two:
From her experiment, Elliott found out that the blue-eyed students excelled in life than the brown-eyed. Even after reversing the exercise so that the blue-eyed students could be the brown-eyed students, she still obtained the same results. She further discovered that melanin made the blue-eyed persons intelligent than those with brown eyes. Another consequence is that as the brown-eyed students played the role of the blue-eyed, they were not as vicious as their blue-eyed students were. The white class had learned the impacts of racism, and they had that opportunity to test it.
Response for Experiment Three:
As much as Albert started by loving the white rat because of its appealing color, life change after that when a hammered metal was introduced. Watson then concluded that when living conditions of people are worsened, more worries set in. Albert did not live long enough for Watson to ascertain the validity of his experiment fully.
5. Regarding the ethics of this study (keeping in mind that ethics and morals are not necessarily interchangeable), do you feel the experiment was ethical? Why or why not? If you would not consider it ethical by today’s standards, do you think it was ethical at the time when the experiment was conducted?
Response for Experiment One:
Sherif’s experiment was not ethical. First, he did not inform the boys about the intentions of the investigation. Second, the boys were not protected despite his antics of rationing the resources and subjecting the boys to harsh conditions. When conducting such a dangerous experiment the participants must be aware of where they are going, what they are going to do, ensure their security and consent must be considered. The experiment was not ethical even when it was conducted since even that time; it threatened the well-being of the boys.
Response for Experiment Two:
Elliott might have significantly contributed to the world, particularly on the side of fighting racism and segregation but her experiment on Blue Eyed versus Brown Eyed Students was unethical and should never be repeated. Deception and consent are more significant issues that must be observed when experimenting (Danko, 2013). In today’s world, people must be transparent when carrying out their research. Since you involve minors in an experiment, their parents ought to be informed about the plans because this experiment will only benefit the teacher and not the children. I believe that when she first conducted this, the U.S had not developed rules and regulations such as consent. But even so, she should have involved the parents of the students.
Response for Experiment Three:
The Little Albert Experiment was not ethical. Albert was sensitive to all the phobias that Watson produced in him. The kid started developing fear after the environment started changing. At first, he was friendly to the white rat, but as the loud metallic bang is introduced, everything changed. It was not right to subject nine months old to such scary surroundings. As much as he died of unrelated illness to phobia, the classical conditioning was not fit for Albert. Most probably, he could have grown with the phobia until adulthood. I understand that when he was conducting this experiment, the U.S laws were too lenient and favored him.
References
Danko. M. (2013) . 10 Psychological Experiments That Could Never Happen Today . Retrieved from http://mentalfloss.com/article/52787/10-famous-psychological-experiments-could-never-happen-today
