Cruel experiments in the history of psychology. Acquired helplessness For Whom the Bell Tolls

Friends, how often do you think that you cannot control the situation in any way? That you are the most unfortunate person on this planet and there is nothing you can do about it, nothing can change? If you think so, then you definitely need to read the publication about one very extraordinary study, which was conducted in 1967 by two psychologists, Mark Seligman and Steve Meyer. Using the example of dogs, they were able to prove that a couple of failures are enough to completely knock out all the desire for resistance.

And so, for a start, in order to better understand what this is about - not a big quote from Wikipedia, what is learned helplessness:

Learned helplessness(eng. learned helplessness), also acquired or learned helplessness- the state of a person or animal, in which the individual does not make attempts to improve his condition (does not try to avoid negative stimuli or get positive ones), although he has such an opportunity. It usually appears after several unsuccessful attempts to influence negative circumstances of the environment (or avoid them) and is characterized by passivity, refusal to act, unwillingness to change the hostile environment or avoid it, even when such an opportunity arises. In humans, according to a number of studies, it is accompanied by a loss of a sense of freedom and control, disbelief in the possibility of changes and in one's own strengths, depression, depression, and even accelerated death. The phenomenon was discovered by American psychologist Martin Seligman in 1967.

Part 1. Learned helplessness, The Dog Experiment.

The experiment consisted in that the dogs were divided into three groups. The first one received a discharge of current until they took action on their own. The second group could not influence the situation in any way and simply received an electric shock, and the third - the control group did not receive an electric shock. As a result of the experiment, the psychologists wanted to find out how this would affect the behavior of the dogs and the desire to escape from the electric shock zone. The results were very surprising.

And so, as I said, in the course of the experiment, all dogs were divided into three groups in the same boxes. The first group was given the opportunity to avoid painful effects: by pressing with its nose on a special panel, the dog of this group could turn off the power of the system causing the blow. Thus, she was able to control the situation, her reaction mattered. In the second group, the deactivation of the shock device depended on the actions of the first group. These dogs received the same blow as the dogs of the first group, but their own reactions did not influence the result. The painful effect on the dog of the second group ceased only when the associated dog of the first group pressed the disconnecting panel. The third group of dogs (control) did not receive a blow at all.

During the experiment, the dogs of the first group learned to turn off the system, the second, they realized their helplessness and were forced to endure. The third group just lived their normal life. After that, all three groups of dogs were placed in a box with a partition, through which any of them could easily jump, and thus get rid of the electric shock.

And what was the result? Both the dogs of the first group and the control group easily jumped over a not high partition, thereby avoiding electric shock. But the dogs of the second group, which could not control the situation during the experiment, rushed around the box, and then lay down on the bottom and, whining, endured electric shocks of greater and greater force.

Part 2. Subsequent experiments.

In the course of the experiment, it was concluded that the troubles themselves do not affect the psyche. An animal, like a person, becomes helpless precisely from the inability to influence the situation. Seligman later conducted a similar experiment with humans, only instead of using current, he used noise. And most people just as quickly became helpless in front of the experimenter and did not try to do anything to change something.

But in fact, not only troubles can deprive us of willpower and make us helpless. This does not require the use of electric current or noise. It is enough just to limit a person's choice. a very illustrative experiment was carried out in 1976 in a nursing home.

To conduct the study, Langer and Rodin randomly selected two floors of a nursing home, the inhabitants of which became participants in the experiment. Thus, the experimental group included 8 men and 39 women (fourth floor), the control group - 9 men and 35 women (second floor), a total of 91 people.

The experimenters agreed with the administration of the institution on two types of experimental conditions. In short, they can be described as follows: the residents of the fourth floor were given increased responsibility for themselves and their way of life, the residents of the second floor were left with the opportunity to lead the usual way of life for patients at home, surrounded by the attention and care of the staff.

The residents of the second floor at the first meeting were given the standard instructions:

We want your rooms to look as comfortable as possible and will try our best to do this. We want you to feel happy here and we consider ourselves responsible so that you can be proud of our nursing home and be happy here ... We will do everything in our power to help you ... I would like to take this opportunity and give everyone of you a gift from Arden House (the employee walked around everyone and handed each patient a plant) now these are your plants, they will stand in your room, the nurses will water them and take care of them, you yourself will not need to do anything

The residents of the fourth floor were told the following:

You yourself have to decide how your room will look like, whether you want to leave everything there as it is, or want our employees to help you rearrange the furniture ... You yourself must tell us your wishes, tell us what exactly you would like to change in your life. In addition, I would like to take advantage of our meeting to present each of you with a gift from Arden House. If you decide that you want to have a plant, you can choose the one that you like from this box. These plants are yours, you must maintain and care for them as you see fit. Next week, two nights, Tuesday and Friday, we will be showing the film. You need to decide on which day you go to the movies and if you want to watch the movie at all.

- Rodin J., Langer E. Long-term effects of a control relevant intervention with the institutionalized aged

Please note that in essence, everyone was given the same conditions, but with one difference. Some conditions were practically imposed, while others were given the right to choose. However, the results were very different. So, average level of happiness of a negative value of −0.12 for the "second floor group" was contrasted with an average score of +0.28 for the "fourth floor group" (according to personal reports of patients). The improvement of the patients 'condition according to the nurses' estimates in the experimental group showed +3.97 versus -2.39 in the control group. There was also a significant difference in the time spent on communication with other patients, talking with the staff, as well as passive observation of the staff (the latter criterion showed -2.14 in the experimental group versus +4.64 in the control group).

Six months after the study, Langer and Rodin returned to Arden House to take another measurement and find out if the experimental action was continuing. The nurses' ratings showed that the subjects in the increased responsibility group continued to be in better condition: the overall average rating for them was 352.33 versus 262.00 for the control group. there were also slight improvements in health in the treatment group and worsening in the control group. And finally, within the time interval that has passed since the first study, 30% of the participants in the control group died, while 15% of the participants in the experimental group died. Based on the findings, the Arden House administration decided to further encourage patients to be in control of their own lives.

Part 3. Summary.

What conclusion should be drawn from all this? I would like to believe that the poor dogs did not suffer in vain and each of you will draw a conclusion that was probably obvious without their suffering. If you have troubles in your life, you yourself are probably to blame! Think, are not you the same dog in a cage that does not want to solve your problems? As it turns out, even old people can perk up if you endow their lives with meaning, so isn't it because we sometimes give in to despair that we just need to pull ourselves together a little? I think it's worth thinking about ...

The publication belongs to the thematic collection: "Cruel Psychology"

Psychology is one of the most unusual sciences, which seems curious and harmless. But not when the experts in the field of cruelty get down to business. And in this collection we have collected just such cases ...

What will happen if a boy is told for half his life that he is a girl? And if you torture a person with an electric current or force the subject to cut off the head of a live rat?

Bigpiccha has compiled nine of the most violent and mindless psychological experiments in history.

1. Raising a Boy as a Girl (1965-2004)

As a result of an unsuccessful operation, 8-month-old Bruce Roemer lost his penis. Psychologist John Money from Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore (USA) recommended that parents put up with and raise the boy as a girl. So Bruce became Brenda, and John Money began to watch with interest. Everything went relatively well until the parents told the boy-girl the truth. Bruce's life was crippled, he tried to commit suicide three times. Still trying to return to normal life, he changed his name and even got married. However, it all ended tragically: after a divorce from his wife, he took his own life. He was 38 years old.

2. The Source of Despair (1960)

Dr. Harry Harlow, fortunately, only practiced on monkeys. He took the cub from his mother and kept him alone for a whole year. After the baby returned to his mother, he showed serious mental abnormalities. However, the obvious conclusion - deprivation of maternal affection leads to problems - could be done in a less cruel way.

3. The Milgram Experiment (1974)

The experiment involved an experimenter, a subject, and an actor who played the role of another subject. Before starting the experiment, the "teacher" was explained that the main goal of the experiment was to discover new methods of memorizing information. A simple experiment on memorization turned into torture: for each incorrect answer, the experimental actor received an electric shock. In fact, there were no electric shocks, but after each error, the voltage "grew" by 15 volts. If the "teacher" refused, the experimenter insisted, explaining how important it was for science. The results were terrible: 65% of the "teachers" reached 450 volts. So Milgrem was able to prove that a person, being under the rule of authority, is able to perform an act that is absolutely incredible for him in ordinary life.

4. Acquired helplessness (1966)

Psychologists Mark Seligman and Steve Meyer have divided dogs into three groups. With the first, nothing happened, the dogs of the second group were electrocuted, but the blows could be stopped by pressing the lever, and the third was the most unlucky. They were also shocked, but it was impossible to avoid this. After a while, the cages of the third group were opened, but none of the dogs even tried to press the lever: they perceived suffering as something already inevitable.

5. "A terrible experiment" (1939)

Wendell Johnson of the University of Iowa (USA) with his graduate student Mary Tudor in 1939 divided 22 orphans from Davenport into two groups. Some were told that their speech was impeccable, others that they stuttered monstrously. In fact, all the children spoke normally.

As a result, the majority of children in the second group developed stuttering, which persisted throughout their lives.

6. Little Albert (1920)

For two months, 9-month-old Albert was shown a tame white rat, cotton wool, a Santa Claus mask with a beard, a white rabbit, etc. But then the doctor of psychology John Watson began to beat the metal plate with an iron hammer behind the child's back every time the boy touched the rat. As a result, Albert became afraid not only of the white rat, but also of cotton wool, Santa Claus and the white rabbit. The phobia stuck with him for life.

Karin Landis of the University of Minnesota studied facial expressions in 1924. Landis showed his students something that could evoke strong emotions: he made young people sniff ammonia, listen to jazz, watch pornographic films and put their hands in buckets of frogs - and recorded facial expressions.

Landis then ordered the students to cut off the rat's head. Most of them agreed. It was not possible to find any patterns in facial expressions, but Landis rightly concluded that in a group, under the influence of authority, a person is capable of much.

A group of monkeys were taught to self-inject various drugs.

Monkeys who took cocaine began to suffer from convulsions and hallucinations - the poor animals pulled out their phalanges of their fingers. Those who consumed amphetamine pulled out all their fur, and animals that were exposed to the simultaneous action of cocaine and morphine died within two weeks of starting.

Psychologist Philip Zimbardo created a very realistic imitation of a prison in the basement of the psychology department, and divided the student volunteers (there were 24 of them) into "prisoners" and "guards."

At first, the students were confused, but the second day of the experiment put everything in its place: the uprising of the "prisoners" was brutally suppressed by the "guards".

Gradually, the control system became so stricter that the "prisoners" were not left alone even in the toilet. When the “prisoners” were asked what their names were, many of them gave their number. The "prisoners" got used to their roles so much that they began to feel like prisoners of a real prison, and the students who got the role of "guards" felt real sadistic emotions towards people who were good friends to them a few days ago.

The experiment was scheduled for two weeks, but it was terminated ahead of schedule for ethical reasons.

Scientists began to conduct various psychological experiments in the middle of the 19th century. Those who are convinced that the role of guinea pigs in such studies is assigned exclusively to animals is mistaken. People often become participants and sometimes victims of experiments. Which of the experiments became known to millions, went down in history forever? Consider a list of the most sensational.

Psychological Experiments: Albert and the Rat

One of the most scandalous experiments of the last century was carried out in 1920. This professor is credited with the founding of the behavioral direction in psychology, he devoted a lot of time to the study of the nature of phobias. The psychological experiments that Watson conducted are mostly related to the observation of the emotions of infants.

Once a participant in his study was an orphan boy Albert, who at the time of the beginning of the experiment was only 9 months old. Using his example, the professor tried to prove that many phobias appear in people at an early age. His goal was to make Albert feel fear at the sight of a white rat, with which the baby was happy to play.

Like many psychological experiments, working with Albert was time consuming. For two months, the child was shown a white rat, and then showed objects visually similar to it (cotton wool, white rabbit, artificial beard). The infant was then allowed to return to his rat games. Initially, Albert did not feel fear, calmly interacted with her. The situation changed when Watson, during his games with the animal, began to hit a metal product with a hammer, causing a loud knock behind the orphan's back.

As a result, Albert began to be afraid to touch the rat, the fear did not disappear even after he was separated from the animal for a week. When they began to show him an old friend again, he burst into tears. The child showed a similar reaction at the sight of objects similar to an animal. Watson was able to prove his theory, but the phobia remained with Albert for life.

Combating racism

Of course, Albert is far from the only child who was subjected to cruel psychological experiments. Examples (with children) are easy to cite, say, the experiment carried out in 1970 by Jane Elliott, called "Blue and Brown Eyes." The school teacher, impressed by the murder of Martin Luther King Jr., decided to demonstrate the horrors to her charges in practice. Students of the third grade became her test subjects.

She divided the class into groups, the participants of which were selected based on eye color (brown, blue, green), and then suggested treating brown-eyed children as representatives of a lower race, not deserving of respect. Of course, the experiment cost the teacher her place of work, the public was outraged. In angry letters addressed to the former teacher, people asked how she could deal so ruthlessly with white children.

Artificial prison

It is curious that not all known cruel psychological experiments on people were originally conceived as such. Among them, a special place is occupied by the research of employees, which has received the name "artificial prison". Scientists did not even imagine how destructive the "innocent" experiment, staged in 1971, authored by Philip Zimbardo, would be for the psyche of the experimental subjects.

The psychologist set out to use his research to understand the social norms of people who have lost their freedom. To do this, he selected a group of volunteer students, consisting of 24 participants, then locked them in the basement of the psychology department, which was supposed to serve as a kind of prison. Half of the volunteers took on the role of prisoners, the rest acted as overseers.

Amazingly, it took the "prisoners" very little time to feel like real prisoners. The same participants in the experiment, who got the role of guards, began to demonstrate real sadistic inclinations, inventing more and more mockery of their wards. The experiment had to be interrupted earlier than planned in order to avoid psychological trauma. In total, people were in the "prison" for a little over a week.

Boy or girl

Psychological experiments on people often end tragically. Proof of this is the sad story of a boy named David Reimer. Even in infancy, he underwent an unsuccessful circumcision operation, as a result of which the child almost lost his penis. This was used by the psychologist John Money, who dreamed of proving that children are not born boys and girls, but become such as a result of upbringing. He convinced the parents to consent to the baby's sex reassignment surgery and then treat him like a daughter.

Little David received the name of Brenda, until the age of 14 he was not informed that he was a male. In adolescence, the boy was given estrogen to drink, the hormone was supposed to activate breast growth. Upon learning the truth, he took the name Bruce, refused to act like a girl. Already in adulthood, Bruce underwent several surgeries, the purpose of which was to restore the physical signs of gender.

Like many other famous psychological experiments, this one had dire consequences. For some time, Bruce tried to improve his life, even got married and adopted the children of his wife. However, the psychological trauma from childhood did not go unnoticed. After several unsuccessful suicide attempts, the man still managed to commit suicide, he died at the age of 38. The life of his parents, who suffered from what was happening in the family, was also ruined. The father turned into also committed suicide.

The nature of stuttering

The list of psychological experiments in which children became participants is worth continuing. In 1939, Professor Johnson, with the support of a graduate student, Maria, decided to conduct an interesting study. The scientist set himself the goal of proving that the parents who “convince” their children that they are stutterers are to blame for the stuttering of children.

To conduct the study, Johnson assembled a group of more than twenty children from orphanages. The participants in the experiment were taught that they have problems with speech, which were absent in reality. As a result, almost all the guys closed in on themselves, began to avoid communicating with others, they really started to stutter. Of course, after the end of the study, the children were helped to get rid of speech problems.

Many years later, some of the group members most affected by the actions of Professor Johnson were awarded large monetary compensation by the State of Iowa. The cruel experiment was proven to be a source of serious psychological trauma for them.

Milgram's Experience

Other interesting psychological experiments were carried out on people. The list cannot but be enriched by the famous research conducted by Stanley Milgram in the last century. The psychologist tried to study the peculiarities of the functioning of the mechanism of submission to authority. The scientist tried to understand whether a person is really capable of performing acts unusual for him, if the person who is his boss insists on this.

Participants made his own students, who treated him with respect. One of the members of the group (student) should answer the questions of others, alternately acting as teachers. If the student was wrong, the teacher had to shock him with an electric shock, this continued until the questions ended. At the same time, an actor acted as a student, only playing the suffering from receiving current discharges, which was not told to the other participants in the experiment.

Like the other psychological experiments on humans listed in this article, the experience has provided startling results. The study involved 40 students. Only 16 of them succumbed to the pleas of the actor, who asked him to stop electrocuting him for mistakes, the rest successfully continued to fire shocks, obeying Milgram's orders. When asked what caused them to hurt a stranger, unaware that he was not really in pain, the students did not find an answer. In fact, the experiment demonstrated the dark sides of human nature.

Landis Research

Psychological experiments on people similar to Milgram's experience were also carried out. Examples of such studies are quite numerous, but the most famous was the work of Carney Landis, dating back to 1924. The psychologist was interested in human emotions, he set up a series of experiments, trying to identify common features expressing certain emotions in different people.

The volunteers in the experiment were mainly students, whose faces were painted with black lines, which made it possible to better see the movement of the facial muscles. The students were shown pornographic materials, forced to sniff substances endowed with a repulsive odor, and put their hands in a vessel filled with frogs.

The most difficult stage of the experiment was the killing of rats, which the participants were ordered to decapitate with their own hands. The experience has produced amazing results, as have many other psychological experiments on people, examples of which you are now reading. About half of the volunteers flatly refused to comply with the professor's order, while the rest coped with the task. Ordinary people, who had never before shown a craving for tormenting animals, obeying the order of the teacher, cut off the heads of living rats. The study did not allow to determine the universal mimic movements inherent in all people, but showed the dark side of human nature.

Fight against homosexuality

A list of the most famous psychological experiments would not be complete without a brutal 1966 experience. In the 60s, the fight against homosexuality gained immense popularity, it is not a secret for anyone that people in those days were forcibly treated for interest in representatives of the same sex.

An experiment in 1966 was performed on a group of people who were suspected of homosexual inclinations. Participants in the experiment were forced to view homosexual pornography, at the same time they were punished for it with electric shocks. It was assumed that such actions should develop in people aversion to intimate contact with persons of the same sex. Of course, all the members of the group received psychological trauma, one of them even died, unable to bear the many.

Teens and gadgets

Psychological experiments on people at home are often performed, but only a few of these experiments become known. A study was published several years ago, in which ordinary adolescents became volunteers. The schoolchildren were asked to give up all modern gadgets for 8 hours, including a mobile phone, laptop, TV. At the same time, they were not forbidden to go for a walk, read, draw.

Other psychologists have not impressed the public as much as this study. The results of the experiment showed that only three of its participants managed to withstand the 8-hour "torture". The remaining 65 "broke down", they had thoughts of leaving life, they faced panic attacks. Also, children complained of symptoms such as dizziness, nausea.

Bystander effect

Interestingly, high-profile crimes can also be an incentive for scientists to conduct psychological experiments. It is easy to recall real examples, say, the experiment "The effect of the witness", staged in 1968 by two professors. John and Bibb were amazed at the behavior of numerous witnesses who watched the murder of Kitty Genovese's girlfriend. The crime was committed in front of dozens of people, but no one made an attempt to stop the killer.

John and Bibb invited volunteers to spend some time in the classroom, reassuring them that their job was to fill out the papers. A few minutes later, the room was filled with harmless smoke. Then the same experiment was conducted with a group of people gathered in one classroom. Then, instead of smoke, recordings with cries for help were used.

Other psychological experiments, examples of which are given in the article, were much more brutal, but the experience of the "Bystander Effect" along with them went down in history. Scientists managed to establish that a person who is alone is much faster to seek help or provide it than a group of people, even if there are only two or three participants in it.

Be like everyone else

In our country, even at the time of existence Soviet Union interesting psychological experiments were carried out on people. The USSR is a state in which for many years it was customary not to stand out from the crowd. It is not surprising that many of the experiments of that time were devoted to the study of the desire of the average person to be like everyone else.

By participants in exciting psychological research there were also children of different ages. For example, a group of 5 children were asked to try rice porridge, which all team members had a positive attitude towards. Four children were fed sweet porridge, then it was the turn of the fifth participant who received a portion of tasteless salty porridge. When these guys were asked if they liked the dish, most of them gave an affirmative answer. This happened because before that all their comrades praised the porridge, and the children wanted to be like everyone else.

Other classical psychological experiments were also performed on children. For example, a group of several participants was asked to call a black pyramid white. Only one child was not warned in advance, he was asked about the color of the toy last. After listening to the answers of their comrades, most of the unwarned kids assured that the black pyramid was white, thus following the crowd.

Experiments with animals

Of course, classical psychological experiments are not only performed on people. The list of high-profile studies that have gone down in history will not be complete without mentioning the experiment on monkeys in 1960. The experiment was named "The Source of Despair" by Harry Harlow.

The scientist was interested in the problem of social isolation of a person, he was looking for ways to protect himself from it. In his studies, Harlow did not use people, but monkeys, or rather the young of these animals. The babies were taken away from their mother, locked up alone in cages. The participants in the experiment were only animals whose emotional connection with their parents was not in doubt.

Baby monkeys, at the behest of the cruel professor, spent a whole year in a cage, not receiving not the slightest "portion" of communication. As a result, most of these prisoners developed obvious mental disorders. The scientist was able to confirm his theory that even a happy childhood does not save from depression. At the moment, the results of the experiment are considered insignificant. In the 60s, the professor received many letters from animal advocates, unwittingly made the movement of fighters for the rights of our smaller brothers more popular.

Acquired helplessness

Of course, other high-profile psychological experiments were carried out on animals. For example, in 1966, a scandalous experiment was staged, called "Acquired helplessness." Psychologists Mark and Steve used dogs in their research. The animals were locked in cages, then they began to hurt them with electric shocks, which they received suddenly. Gradually, the dogs developed symptoms of "acquired helplessness", which resulted in clinical depression. Even after being moved to open cages, they did not flee from the ongoing electric shocks. Animals preferred to endure pain, convinced of its inevitability.

Scientists have found that the behavior of dogs is much like the behavior of people who had a few times to experience failure in one or another business. They are also helpless, ready to accept their bad luck.

One of the following has already been considered here. the most cruel experiments, telling about how a girl was raised from a boy (). But he is not alone in the history of psychology. I suggest you familiarize yourself with other, no less monstrous, experiments.

Little Albert (1920)

John Watson, the father of the behavioral trend in psychology, has been researching the nature of fears and phobias. Studying the emotions of infants, Watson, among other things, became interested in the possibility of forming a fear response in relation to objects that had not previously caused fear. The scientist tested the possibility of the formation of an emotional reaction of fear of a white rat in a 9-month-old boy Albert, who was not at all afraid of a rat and even loved to play with it. During the experiment, for two months, an orphan baby from a shelter was shown a tame white rat, a white rabbit, cotton wool, a Santa Claus mask with a beard, etc. Two months later, the child was put on a rug in the middle of the room and allowed to play with the rat. At first, the child was not at all afraid of the rat and calmly played with it. After a while, Watson began to hit the metal plate behind the child's back with an iron hammer every time Albert touched the rat. After repeating the blows, Albert began to avoid contact with the rat. A week later, the experiment was repeated - this time the strip was hit five times, simply by placing the rat in the cradle. The baby cried only at the sight of a white rat. After another five days, Watson decided to test whether the child would be afraid of similar objects. The child was afraid of a white rabbit, cotton wool, a Santa Claus mask. Since the scientist did not make loud sounds when showing objects, Watson concluded that the fear reactions were transferred. Watson suggested that many of the fears, antipathies and anxiety states of adults are formed in early childhood. Unfortunately, Watson never managed to save baby Albert from his unreasonable fear, which was entrenched for the rest of his life.

The Milgram Experiment (1974)

Stanley Milgram's experiment at Yale University is described by the author in his book Submission to Authority: An Experimental Study. The experiment involved an experimenter, a subject, and an actor who played the role of another subject. At the beginning of the experiment, the roles of “teacher” and “student” were distributed "by lot" between the subject and the actor. In reality, the subject was always given the role of the "teacher", and the hired actor was always the "student". Before the beginning of the experiment, the "teacher" was explained that the purpose of the experiment was supposedly to reveal new methods of memorizing information. In reality, the experimenter is to investigate the behavior of a person who receives instructions that diverge from his internal behavioral norms from an authoritative source. The "student" was tied to a chair to which an electric shock was attached. Both the "student" and the "teacher" received a "demonstration" electric shock of 45 volts. Then the "teacher" went into another room and had to give the "student" simple memorization tasks over the speakerphone. For each student's mistake, the subject had to press a button, and the student received an electric shock of 45 volts. In reality, the actor playing the student only pretended to receive electric shocks. Then, after each mistake, the teacher had to increase the voltage by 15 volts. At some point, the actor began to demand that the experiment be stopped. The "teacher" began to doubt, and the experimenter replied to this: "The experiment requires that you continue. Please continue." As the tension increased, the actor acted out more and more discomfort, then severe pain, and finally broke into a scream. The experiment continued up to 450 volts. If the "teacher" hesitated, the experimenter assured him that he was taking full responsibility for the experiment and for the safety of the "student" and that the experiment should be continued. The results were shocking: 65% of the "teachers" gave a 450 volt discharge, knowing that the "student" was in great pain. Contrary to all the preliminary forecasts of the experimenters, most of the subjects obeyed the instructions of the scientist who led the experiment and punished the "student" with an electric shock, and in a series of experiments of forty subjects, not one stopped to the level of 300 volts, five refused to obey only after this level, and 26 "teachers" from 40 have reached the end of the scale. Critics said that the subjects were hypnotized by the authority of Yale University. In response to this criticism, Milgram repeated the experiment, renting a squalid building in Bridgeport, Connecticut, under the banner of the Bridgeport Research Association. The results did not change qualitatively: 48% of the subjects agreed to reach the end of the scale. In 2002, the combined results of all similar experiments showed that 61% to 66% of "teachers" reach the end of the scale, regardless of the time and place of the experiment. The most frightening conclusions from the experiment followed: the unknown dark side of human nature is inclined not only to mindlessly obey authority and carry out the most inconceivable instructions, but also to justify their own behavior with the received "order". Many participants in the experiment felt a sense of superiority over the "student" and, pressing the button, were sure that the "student" who answered the question incorrectly was getting what he deserved. Ultimately, the results of the experiment showed that the need for obedience to authorities is so deeply rooted in our consciousness that the subjects continued to follow directions, despite mental suffering and intense internal conflict.

Here (http://narod.ru/disk/4518943000/povinuemost_DivX.avi.html) you can download the documentary "Obedience", composed of video materials of Milgram's experiment (474 ​​MB, 49 minutes). Unfortunately, not very good quality.

Stanford Prison Experiment (1971)

The experiment with the "artificial prison" was not conceived by its creator as something unethical or harmful to the psyche of its participants, but the results of this study shocked the public. The famous psychologist Philip Zimbardo decided to study the behavior and social norms of individuals placed in atypical prison conditions and forced to play the role of prisoners or guards. To do this, a simulated prison was equipped in the basement of the Faculty of Psychology, and 24 student volunteers were divided into "prisoners" and "guards." It was assumed that the "prisoners" were initially placed in a situation during which they would experience personal disorientation and degradation, up to complete depersonalization. The "overseers" were not given any special instructions regarding their roles. At first, the students did not really understand how they should play their roles, but on the second day of the experiment everything fell into place: the uprising of the "prisoners" was brutally suppressed by the "guards." From that moment on, the behavior of both sides changed radically. The "guards" have developed a special system of privileges designed to separate the "prisoners" and instill in them mistrust of each other - individually they are not as strong as together, which means that they are easier to "guard". The "guards" began to think that the "prisoners" were ready to start a new "uprising" at any moment, and the control system was tightened to an extreme degree: the "prisoners" were not left alone even in the toilet. As a result, the "prisoners" began to experience emotional distress, depression, and helplessness. After a while, the "prison priest" came to visit the "prisoners". When asked what their names were, the "prisoners" most often called their numbers, not their names, and the question of how they were going to get out of prison led them to a dead end. To the horror of the experimenters, it turned out that the "prisoners" absolutely got used to their roles and began to feel like they were in a real prison, and the "guards" experienced real sadistic emotions and intentions towards the "prisoners" who were their good friends a few days ago. Both sides seemed to have completely forgotten that this was all just an experiment. Although the experiment was scheduled for two weeks, it was terminated early, just six days later for ethical reasons.

Based on this experiment, Oliver Hirschbiegel directed The Experiment (2001).

"Monstrous Experiment" (1939)

In 1939, Wendell Johnson of the University of Iowa (USA) and his graduate student Mary Tudor conducted a shocking experiment involving 22 orphans from Davenport. The children were divided into control and experimental groups. The experimenters told half of the children how cleanly and correctly they spoke. Unpleasant moments awaited the second half of the children: Mary Tudor, sparing no epithets, sarcastically ridiculed the slightest flaw in their speech, eventually calling everyone pitiful stutterers. As a result of the experiment, many children who have never experienced problems with speech and by the will of fate ended up in the "negative" group, developed all the symptoms of stuttering that persisted throughout their life. The experiment, later called "monstrous", was long hidden from the public for fear of damaging Johnson's reputation: similar experiments were later carried out on prisoners of concentration camps in Nazi Germany. In 2001, the University of Iowa made an official apology to all those affected by the study.

Project "Aversia" (1970)

In the South African army, from 1970 to 1989, a secret program was carried out to cleanse the army ranks of military personnel of non-traditional sexual orientation. All means went in: from electroshock treatment to chemical castration. The exact number of victims is unknown, however, according to army doctors, about 1000 military personnel were subjected to various forbidden experiments on human nature during the "purges". Army psychiatrists, on behalf of the command, were "rooting out" homosexuals with might and main: those who did not respond to "treatment" were sent to shock therapy, forced to take hormonal drugs, and even subjected to sex reassignment surgery. In most cases, the "patients" were young white males between the ages of 16 and 24. The research leader, Dr. Aubrey Levin, is now Professor of Psychiatry at the University of Calgary, Canada. He is engaged in private practice.

Research on the effects of drugs on the body (1969)

It should be admitted that some experiments carried out on animals are helping scientists to invent drugs that could later save tens of thousands of human lives. However, some research goes beyond the boundaries of ethics. An example is an experiment designed to help scientists understand the rate and extent of addiction to drugs. The experiment was carried out on rats and monkeys, as on animals closest to humans in physiology. The animals were taught to inject themselves a dose of a certain drug: morphine, cocaine, codeine, amphetamines, etc. As soon as the animals learned to "inject" on their own, the experimenters left them a large number of drugs, left the animals on their own and began to observe. The animals were so confused that some of them even tried to escape, and, being under the influence of drugs, they were crippled and did not feel pain. Monkeys who took cocaine began to suffer from convulsions and hallucinations: the unfortunate animals pulled out their phalanges of their fingers. The monkeys, "sitting" on amphetamines, pulled out all their fur. Addictive animals who preferred a "cocktail" of cocaine and morphine died within 2 weeks of starting the drug. Despite the fact that the purpose of the experiment was to understand and evaluate the degree of drug impact on the human body with the intention of further developing an effective drug addiction treatment, the ways to achieve results can hardly be called humane.

Landis's Experiments: Spontaneous Facial Expressions and Submission (1924)

In 1924, Carini Landis of the University of Minnesota began studying human facial expressions. The experiment, started by the scientist, was supposed to reveal the general patterns of the work of groups of facial muscles responsible for the expression of certain emotional states, and find facial expressions typical of fear, embarrassment or other emotions. The test subjects were his own students. To make the facial expressions more distinct, he drew lines with a burnt cork on the subjects' faces, after which he presented them with something that could evoke strong emotions: he made them sniff ammonia, listen to jazz, look at pornographic pictures, and stick their hands in buckets of toads. At the moment of expressing emotions, the students were photographed. And all would be fine, but the last test that Landis subjected students to, caused misinterpretation in the widest circles of psychologists. Landis asked each subject to cut off the head of a white rat. At first, all the participants in the experiment refused to do this, many cried and shouted, but later most of them agreed to do it. Worst of all, most of the participants in the experiment, as they say, in life did not offend the flies and did not at all imagine how to carry out the order of the experimenter. As a result, the animals suffered a lot. The consequences of the experiment turned out to be much more important than the experiment itself. Scientists have not been able to find any patterns in facial expressions, but psychologists have received evidence of how easily people are ready to submit to authorities and do what they would not have done in an ordinary life situation.

Acquired helplessness (1966)

In 1966, psychologists Mark Seligman and Steve Meyer conducted a series of experiments on dogs. The animals were placed in cages, preliminarily divided into three groups. The control group was released after some time without causing any harm, the second group of animals was subjected to repeated shocks that could be stopped by pressing the lever from the inside, and the animals from the third group were subjected to sudden shocks that could not be prevented. As a result, the dogs developed the so-called "acquired helplessness" - a reaction to unpleasant stimuli, based on the conviction of helplessness in front of the outside world. The animals soon began showing signs of clinical depression. After a while, the dogs from the third group were released from their cages and placed in open enclosures, from which it was easy to escape. The dogs were again electrocuted, but none of them even thought about running away. Instead, they reacted passively to pain, perceiving it as inevitable. The dogs learned from previous negative experiences that escape was impossible and no longer made any attempts to escape from the cage. Scientists have suggested that the human response to stress is much like a dog's: people become helpless after several setbacks, one after the other. It is only unclear whether such a banal conclusion of the suffering of the unfortunate animals was worth it.

"The Source of Despair" (1960)

Harry Harlow conducted his cruel experiments on monkeys. Investigating the issue of social isolation of the individual and methods of protection from it, Harlow took the baby monkey from his mother and placed it in a cage all alone, and he chose those cubs who had the strongest connection with the mother. The monkey was kept in a cage for a year, after which it was released. Most individuals showed various mental abnormalities. The scientist made the following conclusions: even a happy childhood is not a defense against depression. The results, to put it mildly, are not impressive: a similar conclusion could be made without cruel experiments on animals. However, the movement for the protection of animal rights began precisely after the publication of the results of this experiment.

Psychology is famous for unusual and sometimes monstrous experiences. This is not physics, where you have to roll balls on the table, and not biology with its microscopes and cells. Here the objects of research are dogs, monkeys and people. Paul Kleinman described the most famous and controversial experiments in his new work "Psychology". AiF.ru publishes the most notable experiments described in the book.

Prison experiment

Philip Zimbardo conducted an interesting experiment called the Stanford Prison Experiment. Scheduled for two weeks, it was discontinued after 6 days. The psychologist wanted to understand what happens when a person is deprived of their individuality and dignity - as it happens in prison.

Zimbardo hired 24 men, whom he divided into two equal groups and distributed roles - prisoners and warders, and he himself became the "warden". The entourage was appropriate: the guards wore uniforms, and each had a club, but the "criminals", as befits people in such a position, were dressed in inferior overalls, they were not given underwear, and an iron chain was tied to their legs - as a reminder about the prison. There was no furniture in the cells - only mattresses. The food was also not distinguished by delights. In general, everything is for real.

The inmates were kept in cells designed for three people, around the clock. The guards could go home for the night and generally do whatever they wanted with the prisoners (except corporal punishment).

The very next day after the start of the experiment, the inmates barricaded the door to one of the cells, and the warders poured foam from a fire extinguisher on them. A little later, a VIP camera was created for those who behaved well. Very soon, the guards began to play: they forced the prisoners to do push-ups, strip naked and clean the restrooms with their hands. In punishment for the riots (which, by the way, the prisoners regularly organized), their mattresses were taken from them. Later, a normal toilet became a privilege: those who rebelled were not allowed out of the cell - they only brought a bucket.

About 30% of the guards showed sadistic tendencies. Interestingly, the prisoners have become accustomed to their role. At first they were promised $ 15 per day. However, even after Zimbardo announced that he would not pay the money, no one expressed a desire to be released. People volunteered to continue!

On the seventh day, a graduate student visited the prison: she was going to conduct a survey among the experimental subjects. The picture just shocked the girl - she was shocked by what she saw. Looking at the reaction of a stranger, Zimbardo realized that things had gone too far, and decided to prematurely terminate the experiment. The American Psychological Association has strictly prohibited it from ever being repeated for ethical reasons. The ban is still in effect.

Invisible gorilla

Perceptual blindness is a phenomenon when a person is so overwhelmed with impressions that he does not notice anything around him. Attention is completely absorbed in only one object. Each of us suffers from this type of visual blindness from time to time.

Danielle Simons showed the subjects a video where people wearing black and white T-shirts were throwing a ball to each other. The task was simple - to count the number of throws. While two groups of people were throwing the ball, a man dressed in a gorilla costume appeared in the center of the sports ground: he pounded his chest with his fists, just like a real monkey, and then calmly walked away from the field.

After watching the video, the participants in the experiment were asked if they noticed anything strange on the site. And as many as 50% answered negatively: half simply did not see a huge gorilla! This is explained not only by the focus on the game, but also by the fact that we are not ready to see something incomprehensible and unexpected in everyday life.

Assassin teachers

Stanley Milgrem famous for his outrageous experiment, the results of which the hair stands on end. He decided to study how and why people submit to authority. The psychologist was prompted to do this by the trial of a Nazi criminal Adolf Eichmann... Eichmann was accused of being the one who ordered the extermination of millions of Jews during World War II. The lawyers built the defense on the basis of the assertion that he was only a military man and obeyed the orders of the commanders.

Milgrem advertised in the newspaper and found 40 volunteers, ostensibly to study memory and learning abilities. Each was told that someone would be a teacher and someone would be a student. And they even held a draw so that people would take what was happening at face value. In fact, everyone got a piece of paper with the word "teacher". In each pair of experimental subjects, the "student" was an actor who acted in concert with the psychologist.

So what was this shocking experiment about?

1. The “student”, whose task was to memorize the words, was tied to a chair and electrodes were connected to the body, after which the “teacher” was asked to go to another room.

2. There was an electric current generator in the “teacher's” room. As soon as the "student" made a mistake, memorizing new words, he had to be punished with an electric shock. The process began with a small discharge of 30 volts, but each time it increased by 15 volts. The maximum point is 450 volts.

In order for the "teacher" not to doubt the purity of the experiment, they hit him with an electric shock with a voltage of 30 volts - quite tangibly. And this is the only real discharge.

3. Then the fun begins. The "student" remembers the words, but soon makes mistakes. Naturally, the experimental "teacher" punishes him, as it should be according to the instructions. At a discharge of 75 volts (of course, fake), the actor groans, then he squeals and begs to untie him from the chair. Each time the current increases, the screams only get louder. The actor even complains of heart pains!

4. Of course, people were scared and thought whether to continue. Then they were clearly told not to stop under any circumstances. And the people obeyed. While some trembled and chuckled nervously, many did not dare to disobey.

5. At around 300 volts, the actor fiercely pounded on the wall with his fists and shouted that he was in great pain and he could not bear this pain; at 330 volts, it quieted down completely. Meanwhile, the “teacher” was told: since the “student” is silent, this is the same as the wrong answer. This means that the quieted "student" must be shocked again.

7. The experiment ended when the "teacher" chose the maximum discharge of 450 volts.

The conclusions were terrible: 65% of the participants reached the highest point and "draconian" figures of 450 volts - they applied a discharge of such force to a living person! And these are ordinary, "normal" people. But under the pressure of authority, they subjected others to suffering.

The Milgram experiment is still criticized for being unethical. After all, the participants did not know that everything was pretend, and experienced serious stress. No matter how you look at it, inflicting pain on another person turns into a psychological trauma for life.

Heinz's dilemma

Psychologist Laurence Kohlberg studied moral development. He believed that this is a life-long process. Kohlberg presented difficult moral dilemmas to children of all ages to validate his guesses.

The psychologist told the children a story about a woman who was dying - she was killed by cancer. And now, by a happy coincidence, one pharmacist allegedly invented a medicine that could help her. However, he asked for a huge price - $ 2,000 per dose (although the cost of making the drug was only $ 200). The woman's husband - his name was Heinz - borrowed money from friends and raised only half the amount, $ 1,000.

Coming to the pharmacist, Heinz asked him to sell the medicine for his dying wife at a cheaper price, or at least on credit. However, he replied: “No! I have created a medicine and I want to get rich. " Heinz fell into despair. What was to be done? That same night, he secretly entered the pharmacy and stole the medicine. Did Heinz do well?

This is the dilemma. Interestingly, Kohlberg did not study the answers to the question, but the reasoning of the children. As a result, he identified several stages in the development of morality: from the stage when the rules are perceived as absolute truth, and ending with the observance of their own moral principles - even if they go against the laws of society.

For whom the Bell Tolls

Many people know that Ivan Pavlov studied reflexes. But few people know that he was interested in the cardiovascular system and digestion, and he also knew how to quickly and without anesthesia insert a catheter for dogs - in order to track how emotions and medications affect blood pressure (if at all).

Pavlov's famous experiment, when researchers developed new reflexes in dogs, was a grandiose discovery in psychology. Oddly enough, it was he who largely helped explain why a person develops panic disorders, anxiety, fears and psychosis (acute conditions with hallucinations, delusions, depression, inadequate reactions and confusion).

So how did Pavlov's experience with dogs go?

1. A scientist noticed that food (an unconditioned stimulus) causes a natural reflex in dogs in the form of saliva separation. As soon as the dog sees food, saliva starts flowing. But the sound of the metronome is a neutral stimulus, it does not cause anything.

2. Dogs were given the sound of a metronome many times (which, as we recall, was a neutral stimulus). After that, the animals were immediately fed (using an unconditioned stimulus).

3. After a while, the sound of the metronome began to be associated with eating.

4. The last phase is the formed conditioned reflex. The sound of the metronome has always become salivary. And it doesn't matter whether the dogs were given food after it or not. He just became part of the conditioned reflex.

Drawing from the book "Psychology" by Paul Kleinman. Publishing house "Mann, Ivanov and Ferber".

Excerpts provided by Mann, Ivanov and Ferber