Objectives and organization of a psychological experiment

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?

An experiment in psychology is a certain experiment that is carried out under special conditions in order to obtain psychological data through the intervention of a 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

1. Hawthorne experiment
2. Milgram experiment
3. Stanford prison experiment
4. Ringelmann experiment
5. Experiment “Me and Others”
6. "Monstrous" experiment
7. Project "Aversia"
8. Landis experiments
9. Little Albert
10. Acquired (learned) helplessness
11. Boy raised like a girl

1

Main goals and objectives of the experimental method

The goal of conducting a psychological experiment is always to achieve the greatest clarity in establishing connections between internal mental processes and their external manifestations.

The main task of the experimental method in psychology is to identify and implement maximum accessibility for external observation of the characteristics of internal mental processes.

To do this, they change the conditions of external activity and experimentally select a situation in which the observed course of a given act fully testifies to the internal mental content. The task of varying the conditions is to find one, the only correct interpretation of the committed act or action, while eliminating the possibility of others.

Hawthorne experiment

The name Hawthorne experiment refers to a series of socio-psychological experiments that were carried out 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 discovered, 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.

You can find out more about the Hawthorne Experiment here.

2

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 a study by Stanford University employees, called the “artificial prison.” Scientists did not even imagine how destructive the “innocent” experiment carried out in 1971, authored by Philip Zimbardo, would be for the psyche of the test subjects.

The psychologist intended to use his research to understand the social norms of people who have lost their freedom. To do this, he selected a group of student volunteers, 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 guards.

Amazingly, it took the “prisoners” very little time to feel like real prisoners. The same participants in the experiment who got the role of supervisors began to demonstrate real sadistic tendencies, inventing more and more new bullying against their charges. The experiment had to be interrupted earlier than planned to avoid psychological trauma. In total, the people stayed in the “prison” for just over a week.

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 read the details of Milgram's experiment here.

3

"Third Wave"

The question that concerned Stanley Milgram and other researchers was dictated by the realities of World War II. Why did millions of Germans, who belonged to one of the most educated and cultural nations of the Western world, follow the lead of the propaganda machine of the Third Reich and become capable of acts of brutal violence? How did this happen?

It’s not just psychologists who have asked this question. In regular schools, regular teachers were thinking the same thing. Among them was Ron Jones , who in 1967 taught history at a gymnasium in the Californian town of Palo Alto. One of the high school students asked him how the people of Germany could put up with the mass extermination of people, concentration camps and other horrors of that time. Ron Jones didn't know what to say, so he decided to conduct an experiment in class.

On Monday, he convincingly explained to the students what advantage discipline gives people and suggested doing several exercises (how to sit “correctly”, how to silently enter the classroom, etc.). Surprisingly, the students liked it and were willing to follow the instructions, even when they sounded authoritarian.

On Tuesday, the students met the teacher in the “correct” sitting positions, and he began to explain to them the power of community. They came up with and learned a motto, which they chanted in unison (“Strength in discipline, strength in community”), and then a gesture of greeting. Ron called it the "Third Wave" salute and encouraged everyone to use it when they met. On Wednesday, students from other classes began to join them, Jones began issuing membership cards, appointed himself a bodyguard and gave the children a variety of tasks: to design a “Third Wave” flag, to recruit students from a nearby school, to report on those who do not obey the rules... K By the end of the day the movement had grown to 200 people.

On Thursday, a teacher explained to students the power of pride and said that their movement is part of a secret government program, the purpose of which is to select the most worthy children. All over the country, he said, branches of the “Third Wave” have already been created, and tomorrow at noon the leader of the movement will speak on television. He ordered three girls whose loyalty the teacher doubted to be taken out of the classroom.

At noon on Friday, 200 students were packed into the classroom, waiting for the television broadcast. The TV was turned on, but the screen was blank. After waiting a little, Ron Jones started the film with newsreels of the Third Reich. When he turned on the light, there was silence in the hall, and his “bodyguard” was crying. "There is no national 'Third Wave' movement," Jones said. - You were used, you were manipulated. And it turned out that you are no better than those Germans from the times of Nazi Germany that we studied.”

“Russians are chopping children with an axe.” Why are Goebbels’s fictions adored in the West? More details

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.

4

Notable Research

Many psychological experiments have been conducted throughout history. They differed from each other in their impact and ultimate goals. Among all this diversity, several famous experiments can be distinguished:

1. Milgram's experiment. It was described in 1963. His main goal was to determine how much suffering one person can cause to another if it is part of his job duties or his boss orders him to do so. Scientists wanted to find out how people participated in the murder of fellow soldiers. After analyzing the results, Milgram proved that not all people can resist the will of their leadership.
2. Hawthorne experiment. This term refers to a set of experiments that were carried out in 1924-1932. They were carried out at a factory in America, Western Electrics. Research began due to the fact that the pace of work in production had slowed down. The factory owners wanted to increase the work pace, which is why they gave the researchers complete freedom of action. During the experiment, scientists noted that workers began to work faster due to increased attention to them. The researchers concluded that the pace of work depends on the social factors surrounding it.
3. Stanford prison experiment. The experiment was conducted by American scientist Philip Zimbardo in 1971. Its essence was to find out the reaction of people to the conditions of prison and the social roles imposed on them. Participants were divided into prisoners and guards. After 6 days, the experiment began to get out of control, because some guards began to show sadistic tendencies, and the prisoners began to experience serious psychological trauma.
4. Me and others. It is a Soviet film in which several psychological experiments were demonstrated. The main essence of these experiments was to show how others influence the individual. After watching the film, we can say that a person is highly dependent on the opinions of others. Because of this, people often change their own opinions when they see that others do not agree with them.
5. Ringelmann's experiment. It was first described in 1913, but carried out only in 1927. To conduct the experiment, scientists recruited a group of people. Study participants were required to perform one job. The first work process involved lifting heavy objects, the other involved tug-of-war. Scientists have proven that the more people working in one group, the less efficient the work process will be.
6. A monstrous experiment. It was held in the USA in 1939. The purpose of the experiment was to find out how suggestible children are. To do this, the researchers selected 22 children from an orphanage and divided them into two groups. Some were constantly praised. Others were called stutterers and their shortcomings were pointed out. As a result, children who were taught only bad things began to speak worse and developed symptoms of stuttering that lasted for the rest of their lives. This experiment was hidden from the public for a long time.
7. Little Albert. A famous experiment that is considered inhumane. The scientist wanted to prove that fear can be developed or suppressed in childhood. To do this, the child was shown a picture of a rat and a sharp loud sound was made. The baby began to cry. Subsequently, the child began to cry even without a sharp sound, only from seeing the image of a rat.
8. Project Aversia. An experiment conducted in the ranks of the South African army. Its goal was to identify and destroy homosexuals in the army. More than 1,000 people participated in the study. They were subjected to such means as shockers, drugs, castrations, and poisoning with chemicals. Many of the participants committed suicide, while others were never able to recover from the consequences. The experiment itself failed because it was not based on any scientific evidence.
9. Landis' experiments. This is a whole series of experiments that were carried out in 1924. His goal was to determine how the facial muscles that express emotion work. The experiment involved students taught by Landis. The muscles were marked with lines to see how they changed their position relative to each other. After this, students were shown or told something that could cause strong emotions. As a result, no patterns were identified.
10. A boy who was raised as a girl. An experience considered the most inhumane throughout history. It was carried out over several decades - from 1965 to 2004. At the beginning of the experiment, scientists took control of a boy, Bruce Reimer, who was born in 1965. During the circumcision operation, his penis was damaged, which is why his parents were advised to raise him as a girl. The parents approved of the plan and agreed to gender reassignment surgery and further education. Psychologist John Money wanted to prove to the world that gender is a result of upbringing, and not a creation of nature, but teachers and parents began to notice that the technique did not produce results. The child exhibited all the behavioral characteristics of a boy. A few years later, the former Bruce decided to fully become a man and underwent gender reassignment surgery. Having matured, he found a wife and adopted a child. When the man turned 38 years old, he committed suicide due to severe psychological trauma received in childhood.
11. Learned helplessness. This is a mental state in which a person does absolutely nothing to improve his own situation, even if there are all the prerequisites and opportunities for this. This happens if a person has made several unsuccessful attempts to change negative environmental factors. The phenomenon was discovered in 1966 by Steve Miner and Martin Seligman.

These experiments stand out the most. Any experiments conducted with people are limited by many rules to protect a person from any negative consequences.

Psychological experiments are carried out to obtain information about changes in the psyche of experimental subjects. Experience helps to understand how a person will react to external stimuli; researchers can create certain conditions and situations.

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 here.

5

Objectives of the study

Experts distinguish between exploratory, pilot, and confirmatory experiments depending on the purpose of the study:

• Search experiment. As a rule, it is aimed at searching for a cause-and-effect relationship between phenomena and is carried out at the initial stage of the study. A search experiment allows you to formulate a hypothesis, identify independent, dependent and secondary variables, and also determine ways to control them;
• A pilot experiment or trial, the first in a series. It is conducted without strict control of variables on a small sample. This type of experiment makes it possible to eliminate gross errors in the formulation of the hypothesis, as well as to specify the goal and clarify the methodology of the experiment;
• Confirmatory experiment. This type is aimed at clarifying the quantitative relationships between variables and establishing the type of functional connection. It is carried out at the final stage of the study.

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 killer”: subjects are shown a portrait of the same person, having previously imagined him as a scientist or a killer. Participants must create a psychological portrait of this person.
• “Both white”: black and white pyramids 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.

You can read about the film “Me and Others” in more detail, as well as watch the film itself on this page.

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.

6

How is experience different from experiment?

When answering the question of how experience differs from experiment, each term should be defined. Experience is a scientific process, the purpose of which is to refute or confirm a hypothesis and subsequently consolidate the theory in practice. The experiment is always carried out in a strictly limited area. An experiment is a controlled study aimed at confirming a hypothesis, in which the scientist can interact with and guide the object of study.

Experimental work is carried out for the first time, and the experiment is carried out subject to a predetermined result. Experiments are sometimes carried out spontaneously, without any purpose, while the scientist never knows exactly where his research will lead - he can prepare for any outcome of events. Experiments are carried out once, and experiments can be repeated an unlimited number of times.

"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.

More detailed information about the “monstrous” experiment is here.

7

Classification by level of awareness

What other types of experiments in psychology exist? Similar studies are divided according to the level of awareness of what is happening by a person.

In this case, the following are distinguished:

1. An obvious experiment. When conducting it, the subject has comprehensive information about the goals and objectives of the research being conducted.
2. Intermediate. This option involves familiarizing the subject with only part of the information about the experience. Other information is either distorted or concealed.
3. Hidden. The participant, as a rule, knows nothing about this experiment. He does not know not only about the goals that psychologists face, but also about the very fact of carrying out the work.

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.

8

The bystander effect (aka the bystander effect), 1968

The idea for this experiment has its roots in the 1964 Kitty Genovese rape and murder case in New York City. 38 people watched the crime, but none of them intervened.

Researchers John Darley and Bib Latané conducted 3 experiments in which subjects acted either alone or with a group of people. An emergency situation was played out in front of them (for example, an elderly woman falling), and psychologists watched whether the participants in the experiment would come to help or not.

It turned out that the more information (name of the victim, why he was in trouble, etc.) the “witness” receives, the higher the likelihood that he will come to the rescue. Additionally, people may feel less responsible for intervening when there are many other people around. And if no one else reacts or takes action to help the victim, the situation is not perceived as an emergency.

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 read more about Landis' experiments here.

9

The Little Albert Experiment, 1920

For an experiment conducted by Dr. John B. Watson, a nine-month-old baby from an orphanage was chosen and given the name "Albert B." He played with white fluffy objects (a skein of yarn, a white rabbit, a pet white rat, etc.) and initially showed joy and affection for his toys.

Over time, as Albert played with these objects, Dr. Watson would make loud noises behind the child to scare him. After numerous trials, Albert began to be afraid of one type of white fluffy objects.

Conclusions of the study: a person can be “programmed” to fear or enjoy something.

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.

10

Marshmallow test

This experiment is the most harmless in this series, and it is from a slightly different area of ​​research, but it’s worth starting with. Firstly, this is a classic of social psychology, and secondly, we are talking about tests of willpower, and the ability to resist the opinion of the majority depends on it.

A series of tests, called "marshmallow tests", were conducted in the late 1960s and early 1970s on children. American psychologist Walter Mischel wanted to find out at what age a person develops the ability to wait and sacrifice less for more. A treat of his choice was placed in front of the child (children aged 4 to 6 years old took part): marshmallows, cookies or pretzel. He could eat it immediately, but the subject was warned: if he waited a little, the reward would double - instead of one marshmallow, he would be given two. After which the child was left alone for fifteen minutes and his behavior was observed.

The children behaved differently: some covered their eyes or turned away so as not to see the delicacy, some pounded on the table, some played with the marshmallow as if nothing had happened, and some ate it right away. And that turned out to be the majority. Only a third of the subjects (out of more than 600) were able to show their will and wait for the double treat.

TEST: Are you capable of achieving success in life? More details

Walter Mischel and his colleagues traced the further fate of the participants. It turned out that children who were able to survive until the double award, as a rule, succeeded in life, receiving a better education and moving up the social ladder. In this regard, it is generally accepted that a child passing the marshmallow test is a sign of his future success. There are even parents who do this experiment with their children, forcing them to languish in anticipation of a double helping of treats, and they will benefit from knowing that two years ago the very concept of the study was questioned.

Scientists from the University of New York and the University of California changed the conditions of the classic experiment - they increased the sample, making it more representative in terms of race, ethnicity and income of the families from which the participating children were taken. It turned out that a child's ability to wait for the second marshmallow is determined mainly by his social and economic environment. In other words, children whose parents earn more have an easier time deferring gratification. They know that adults will not leave them, because the “pantries” of the house are always full. It is much more difficult for children from poor families: today there is food, but tomorrow there may not be any. Therefore, it’s better not to wait for the second marshmallow, otherwise, you’ll see, the first one will disappear.

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 about what learned helplessness is and about experiments related to this concept here.

11

Learned helplessness

Of course, other high-profile psychological experiments were conducted on animals. Let's say, 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 and then given sudden electric shocks. Gradually, the dogs developed symptoms of “learned helplessness,” which resulted in clinical depression. Even after they were 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 in many ways similar to the behavior of people who have experienced failure several times in one business or another. They are also helpless, ready to accept their bad luck.

General concept of psychological experiment

Entry text:

General concept of psychological experiment

General concept of psychological experiment

1. Types of psychological experiment

Experimental psychology is a branch of psychology whose goal is the experimental study of the psyche. The first psychological experiment was conducted in the 18th century. As a scientific direction, experimental psychology emerged in the second half of the 19th century. thanks to the works of E. Weber, W. Wundt, V.M. Bekhtereva and others.

It is generally accepted that with the introduction of experiment into psychology, its chronicle begins as an independent science. The prospect of a mathematically precise substantiation of psychological laws has opened up. Objectivity, repeatability, and verifiability become criteria for the reliability of a psychological fact and the basis for classifying it as scientific. Experimental psychology was based on the theoretical principles of empirical psychology and the results of research into the psychophysiology of the senses. Representatives of experimental psychology were characterized by empiricism and methodological limitations. With the development of psychology, there was no longer any need to separate experimental psychology into a separate branch of psychological science, since the experimental method began to be used in psychological research.

The experimental method (from the Latin experimentum - test, experience) is a method that involves developing a control plan for an independent variable, creating and measuring special conditions in order to cause the process being studied and influence its course. Experiment is one of the main methods of scientific knowledge in general, psychological research in particular. The essence of the experimental method is that it places the phenomena being studied under certain conditions and creates deliberately organized situations. The more perfect these changes in conditions are, the more facts appear on the basis of which a non-random relationship is established between experimental influences and objective results. The experiment allows you to study certain aspects of personality under the influence of factors in specially created conditions.

A psychological experiment is one of the main methods of psychological research, which allows one to place the phenomena under study in certain conditions and create deliberately organized situations. A psychological experiment is a method of studying mental phenomena (processes, states, properties and formations), in which the truth of the put forward assumptions (hypotheses) is tested. This is a purposeful, precisely taking into account the conditions, strictly staged experiment, which allows not only to describe mental phenomena, but also to explain them. An experiment makes it possible to decompose and separately study the components of a phenomenon, more or less accurately record the results, monitor the progress of the development of a mental phenomenon, not waiting for it to arise, but causing it, actively recreating it in the most favorable conditions, vary, intervene in a planned manner, change and repeat the features of its implementation many times.

In contrast to the study of mental phenomena (facts) in natural conditions through direct observation, an experiment allows you to artificially separate the phenomenon being studied from others, purposefully change the conditions of the formative influence on the subjects, and track the results obtained.

Successful conduct of a psychological experiment requires: understanding the essence of not only empirical, but also theoretical knowledge; ability to master the system of cognitive procedures; psychological mastery, where the organizational skills of the experimenter play a special role.

A psychological experiment serves to study the facts with the help of which certain objective dependencies in mental processes, states, properties and formations are discovered. During the experiment, various sources of obtaining facts are used: observation, individual conversation, sociometric measurements, organization of certain types of group and individual activities. Without concrete facts there can be no experiment.

I.P. Pavlov said that “facts are the air of a scientist, without them you will never be able to take off. Without them, your “theories” are empty attempts.”

A psychological experiment, depending on the conditions under which it is conducted, can be of various types. Its classification is based on a number of criteria:

a) according to the time of the experiment - short-term and long-term (longitudinal);

b) according to the structure of the phenomena being studied - single-factor (simple) and multi-factor (complex);

c) according to the purposes of the study - ascertaining and formative;

d) according to the organization of the conduct - laboratory and natural;

e) for control of variables - ideal and real;

e) according to the number of hypotheses - critical and demonstration.

The four main types of experiment are most often used: laboratory, natural, ascertaining and formative.

One of the features of the experiment is that it is used to identify non-random relationships between experimental influences and their results under specially created experimental conditions. However, in the process of a psychological experiment, one must take into account the fact that subjects participate in it, therefore one cannot arbitrarily vary, trying various experimental situations in a row, which would harm the process of development of their personality.

The second feature of a psychological experiment is that with its help, such mental phenomena and their dependencies are studied that cannot be obtained in their pure form by taking them out of life. Mental phenomena, as a rule, are woven into a very complex and dynamic system of external and internal interactions of subjects with the environment. Here there is always a mutual penetration of natural living conditions and experimentally created conditions into each other.

The natural living conditions of the subjects can be considered as interference that cannot be completely eliminated. The result of the experiment is influenced not only by specially organized influences, but also by the entire set of life influences. This cannot be ignored when the moment of processing the material comes and the degree of purity of the result is determined.

The third feature of the experiment is the long preparatory stage immediately preceding the practical experimental work. During this period, scientific-cognitive tasks, experimental hypotheses, and a plan for its conduct are developed, and the subjects are studied in terms of their psychological characteristics. To formulate a scientific-cognitive task means to define a psychological dependence that will be studied through an experiment.

The fourth feature of the experiment is related to the choice of the object of experimentation. It is advisable to carry out an experimental study of personality by working with small groups that can not only be effectively controlled in accordance with the hypothesis, but can also be controlled by a larger number of factors, connections and dependencies.

The experimental techniques are extremely varied. Often, studying even closely related issues of the same problem requires the development of independent methods. But whatever methodology is developed, one must be guided by the following requirements.

1. Conducting preliminary targeted observation of the phenomena being studied in order to determine initial data and a hypothesis or a series of interrelated hypotheses.

2. Creation of conditions in which experimentation is possible, selection of objects for experimental influence, and, if possible, their equalization.

3. Careful development of the experimental work procedure.

4. Systematic observations of the development of the phenomenon (object) being studied and an accurate description of the facts. In some cases, such accuracy of description is needed when the result can be expressed mathematically.

5. Carrying out systematic registration of facts by various means and methods using appropriate devices, diagrams, questionnaires, tests, psychological characteristics, and mathematical apparatus.

6. The transition from empirical study to logical generalizations, to analysis and theoretical processing of the obtained factual material. Facts are always the consequence of causes, and these causes are established on the basis of facts.

Research is not limited to the sum of facts obtained by experiment. The highest stage in the process of cognition is theoretical thinking. From empirical data, from the facts of the experiment, the researcher moves on to generalizations, to the disclosure of cause-and-effect relationships. In the process of theoretical work, previously existing scientific ideas are analyzed in comparison with the experimental data obtained.

Along with the emergence of new types of psychological experiment, it is also necessary to note some of the most important changes that have occurred in the general methodological nature of the psychological experiment itself. This includes the development and widespread use in experimental research:

a) general methods aimed at ensuring, first of all, the fullest possible control of experimental conditions, for example, such as the method of parallel groups - experimental and control;

b) special methods, for example, such as methods for studying the phenomena of memory, attention, emotions, etc.;

c) relevant technical equipment, with extensive use of video filming, sound recording, computers, etc.;

d) appropriate statistical methods that made it possible to conduct an experiment with two or more independent variables.

The most important factors that determined both the emergence of new types of psychological experiments and the changes that occurred in the general methodological nature of the experiment itself include the following: a) changes that have occurred in the understanding of the general tasks of psychology; b) gradual expansion of the scope of application of experimental methods in the study of mental phenomena; c) the desire to obtain more and more accurate, reliable and objective results in experimental studies.

2. Subject area of ​​the experiment

Classifications of types of experiments are based on different grounds. One of these grounds, or classification criteria, is that the original hypothesis, experimental conditions, or sample of subjects belong to special areas of mental reality, i.e. their relevance to a specific subject area .

The paths of transition from the “world of empiricism” to the “world of theories” that have developed in one or another area of ​​psychological knowledge include the orientation of researchers towards the principles of interpretation of psychological patterns that are justified within the framework of specific theories. For example, testing the hypothesis about the role of eye movements in the emergence of the Müller-Lyer illusion traditionally belongs to the field of psychology of perception, while the analysis of factors influencing the identification of emotional states from photographs of faces belongs to the psychology of emotions. La Pierre's experiment, which showed the difference in the manifestation of ethnic prejudices at the verbal and behavioral levels, traditionally belongs to the field of social psychology. In this experiment, inquiries were first sent to hotels asking whether they would accept Chinese people, and then the researcher actually visited these addresses with the Chinese.

Research on the influence of personal prerequisites on the success of entrepreneurial activity should be classified as a developing field of entrepreneurial psychology. But with the same right they can be attributed to personality psychology, if we consider the specific conditions of the professional activity of the subjects only as a specific background for the manifestation of personal factors regulating activity.

With this approach, there is a possibility of making a mistake in the interpretation of the psychological mechanisms that manifested themselves in the experiment. A classic example is the so-called Hawthorne experiment, which, according to its goals, should be classified as labor psychology. Let us recall that it changed numerous environmental factors and assessed the impact of these changes on labor productivity. As it turned out, any change, regardless of its type, led to an improvement in the performance of workers. The interpretation that people, knowing about the goals of the experiment, responded positively to the very fact of an attempt to improve their working conditions was accepted as adequate. Now this experiment is presented more often in sections devoted to “experimenter effects” rather than work psychology, since the pattern that emerged in it turned out to be a more general mechanism.

At the same time, we must not forget about the subject-matter relevance of psychological hypotheses to one or another area of ​​psychological knowledge, since each of these areas has developed its own special standards for testing hypotheses, related to the type of construction of the psychological theory itself and the possibilities of collecting empirical material.

A professional engaged in perceptual research will differ from a professional devoted to research in the field of social psychology precisely in the development of forms of experimental control, since the experiment in each of these areas implements different approaches to ways of controlling variables, different understandings of causality and consideration of other types of justifications in organizing meaningful conclusions.

3. Differences in the forms of experiment implementation

An experiment conducted with the aim of obtaining empirical evidence in favor or against the understanding of a psychological pattern assumed in a hypothesis is called real, or implemented. It is contrasted with a thought experiment, i.e. practically not implemented. A thought experiment can be flawless and endless.

A flawless experiment is a mental model of a psychological experiment in which there are no threats to a valid conclusion.

An infinite experiment is a mental model for evaluating actual experiments in which the number of trials or number of subjects is evaluated to cover all sources of variability in variables.

The relationship between substantive and formal design in these types of experiments is common in all those contexts that do not take into account the problem of controlling for confounding of independent variables with covariates. In the experiments being carried out, it is impossible to make do with the assumption of the absence of mixtures, but it is necessary to ensure their control in order to be able to take into account their influence on the obtained experimental effects. In thought experiments, one can assume any ideal conditions and consider basic processes in any indicator of their manifestations, even if there are no real methods for operationalizing variables yet. When evaluating a psychological hypothesis in terms of the results implied by a thought experiment, there is no need to relate the outcome of the independent variable to an assessment of the internal and operational validity of the experiment.

List of used literature

1. Druzhinin V.N. Experimental psychology: textbook.

– M.: INFRA-M, 2000.

2. Kornilova T.V. Introduction to psychological experiment: textbook. – M.: Moscow State University Publishing House, CheRo, 1997.

Druzhinin V.N. Experimental psychology: textbook. – M.: INFRA-M, 2000

Kornilova T.V. Introduction to psychological experiment: textbook. – M.: Moscow State University Publishing House, CheRo, 1997