Diverse psychological experiments scientists began to conduct as early as the middle of the 19th century. Those who are convinced that the role of guinea pigs in such studies is assigned exclusively to animals are 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 notorious.

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 founding the behavioral direction in psychology, he devoted a lot of time to studying the nature of phobias. The psychological experiments that Watson conducted were mostly related to the observation of the emotions of infants.

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

Like many psychological experiments, working with Albert took a long time. For two months, the child was shown a white rat, and then they were shown objects visually similar to it (cotton wool, a white rabbit, an artificial beard). The infant was then allowed to return to his games with the rat. 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 became afraid to touch the rat, the fear did not disappear even after he was separated from the animal for a week. When the old friend was again shown to him, he burst into tears. The child showed a similar reaction when he saw objects that looked like animals. Watson managed to prove his theory, but the phobia remained with Albert for life.

Fight against 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, an experiment conducted in 1970 by Jane Elliott, called "Blue and Brown Eyes." A schoolteacher, under the impression of the murder of Martin Luther King Jr., decided to show her wards the horrors in practice. Her test subjects were third-grade students.

She divided the class into groups whose members were selected based on eye color (brown, blue, green), after which she suggested treating brown-eyed children as representatives of an inferior race who did not deserve respect. Of course, the experiment cost the teacher her job, the public was outraged. In angry letters addressed to the former teacher, people asked how she could treat white children so ruthlessly.

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 of employees called "artificial prison". Scientists did not even imagine how destructive the “innocent” experiment, set in 1971, authored by Philip Zimbardo, would be for the psyche of the experimental subjects.

The psychologist intended through his research to understand the social norms of people who had 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 psychological faculty, 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.

Surprisingly, it took the “prisoners” quite a bit of time to feel like real prisoners. The same participants in the experiment, who got the role of guards, began to demonstrate real sadistic inclinations, coming up with more and more bullying over their wards. The experiment had to be interrupted ahead of schedule in order to avoid psychological trauma. In total, people stayed in the “prison” for just 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 taken advantage of by psychologist John Money, who dreamed of proving that children are not born boys and girls, but become such as a result of upbringing. He persuaded the parents to consent to the surgical sex change of the child, and then treat him like a daughter.

Little David received the name 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. After learning the truth, he took the name Bruce, refused to act like a girl. Already in adulthood, Bruce underwent several operations, the purpose of which was to restore the physical signs of sex.

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 his wife's children. However, psychological trauma from childhood did not go unnoticed. After several unsuccessful suicide attempts, the man still managed to lay hands on himself, he died at the age of 38. The life of his parents, who suffered from what is happening in the family, turned out to be destroyed. 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 parents are primarily to blame for stuttering in children, who “convince” their children that they are stutterers.

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

Many years later, some of the members of the group most affected by Professor Johnson's actions received a large monetary settlement from the State of Iowa. It was proved that the cruel experiment became a source of serious psychological trauma for them.

The Milgram Experience

Other interesting psychological experiments were carried out on people. The list can not be enriched with the famous study, which was carried out in the last century by Stanley Milgram. The psychologist tried to study the features 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 a person who is his boss insists on this.

Participants made his own students who treated him with respect. One of the group members (the student) must answer the questions of the others, who alternately act as teachers. If the student was wrong, the teacher had to give him 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 other participants in the experiment.

Like other psychological experiments on humans listed in this article, the experience provided amazing results. The study involved 40 students. Only 16 of them succumbed to the pleas of the actor, who asked to stop shocking him for mistakes, the rest successfully continued to discharge discharges, obeying Milgram's order. When they were asked what caused them to inflict pain on a stranger, not suspecting that he was not really in pain, the students did not find what to answer. In fact, the experiment demonstrated the dark side of human nature.

Landis research

Psychological experiments similar to Milgram's experience were also carried out on people. 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 in the expression of certain emotions in different people.

Volunteer participants in the experiment were mostly students whose faces were painted with black lines, allowing them to better see the movement. facial muscles. Students were shown pornographic materials, they were forced to sniff substances endowed with a repulsive odor, to dip their hands into a vessel filled with frogs.

The most difficult stage of the experiment is the killing of rats, which the participants were ordered to decapitate with their own hands. The experience gave amazing results, like many other psychological experiments on people, examples of which you are now reading. Approximately half of the volunteers flatly refused to carry out the professor's order, while the rest coped with the task. Ordinary people, who had never shown a craving for torturing animals, obeying the order of the teacher, cut off the heads of living rats. The study did not allow us to determine the universal facial movements inherent in all people, however, it demonstrated the dark side of human nature.

The fight against homosexuality

The list of the most famous psychological experiments would not be complete without a cruel experiment staged in 1966. In the 60s, the fight against homosexuality gained immense popularity, it is no secret to anyone that people in those days were treated forcibly from interest in members of their own sex.

The 1966 experiment was set up on a group of people who were suspected of having homosexual tendencies. Participants in the experiment were forced to view homosexual pornography while being punished for it with electric shocks. It was assumed that such actions should develop in people an aversion to intimate contact with persons of the same sex. Of course, all members of the group received psychological trauma, one of them even died, unable to withstand numerous. It was not possible to find out whether the experience had an effect on the orientation of homosexuals.

Teenagers and gadgets

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

Other psychological studies 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 dying, they faced panic attacks. The children also complained of symptoms such as dizziness and nausea.

bystander effect

Interestingly, high-profile crimes can also become an incentive for scientists who conduct psychological experiments. It is easy to recall real examples, for example, the “Effect of the Witness” experiment, staged in 1968 by two professors. John and Bibb were amazed at the behavior of the numerous witnesses who watched the murder of the girl Kitty Genovese. 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 audience, with the assurance that their job was to fill out paperwork. A few minutes later, the room was filled with harmless smoke. Then the same experiment was carried out with a group of people gathered in the same room. Further, instead of smoke, records with cries for help were used.

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

Be like everyone else

In our country, even during the existence Soviet Union curious 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 experiments of that time were devoted to the study of the desire of the average person to be like everyone else.

Children also became participants in fascinating psychological research different ages. For example, a group of 5 children was asked to try rice porridge, which was positively treated by all members of the team. Four children were fed sweet porridge, then it was the turn of the fifth participant, who received a portion of the 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 porridge, and the children wanted to be like everyone else.

Other classic psychological experiments were also performed on children. For example, a group of several participants was asked to name a black pyramid white. Only one child was not warned in advance, he was asked about the color of the toy in last turn. 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 conducted in 1960. The experiment was called "The Source of Despair", its author was 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 research, Harlow did not use people, but monkeys, or rather the young of these animals. Babies were taken away from their mothers, locked up alone in cages. The participants in the experiment were only animals whose emotional connection with their parents was not in doubt.

At the behest of a cruel professor, the monkey cubs spent a whole year in a cage without receiving 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 recognized as 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.

Learned helplessness

Of course, other high-profile psychological experiments were carried out on animals. For example, in 1966, a scandalous experience was staged, called "Acquired Helplessness." Psychologists Mark and Steve used dogs in their research. Animals were locked in cages, then they were hurt with electric shocks that they received suddenly. Gradually, the dogs developed symptoms of "acquired helplessness", which resulted in clinical depression. Even after they were moved to open cages, they did not flee from the continued 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 way or another. They are also helpless, ready to accept their bad luck.

Man and the features of his personality have been the object of interest and study of the great minds of mankind for more than one century. And from the very beginning of the development of psychological science to the present day, people have managed to develop and significantly improve their skills in this difficult but exciting business. Therefore, now, in order to obtain reliable data in the study of the characteristics of the human psyche and his personality, people use big amount a variety of methods and methods of research in psychology. And one of the methods that have gained the greatest popularity and proven themselves 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 recall what a psychological experiment is and what are its features, and also briefly touch on the types and characteristics of the experiment.

What is an experiment?

Experiment in psychology- this is a certain experience, which is carried out in special conditions, in order to obtain psychological data by interfering with the researcher in the process of the subject's activity. Both a specialist scientist and a simple layman can act as a researcher during the 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 holding;
• 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, aerobatic, 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 the experiment and other research methods in psychology in our lesson “Methods of Psychology”. Now we turn to the most famous psychological experiments.

The most famous psychological experiments

hawthorne experiment

The name Hawthorne experiment refers to a series of socio-psychological experiments that were 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 raising productivity, the scientists were given absolute freedom actions. Their goal was to identify the relationship between the physical conditions of work and the efficiency of workers.

After a long study, scientists came to the conclusion that labor productivity is influenced by social conditions and, mainly, the emergence of workers' interest in the work process, as a result of their awareness of their participation in the experiment. The mere fact that workers are singled out in a separate group and manifested to them Special attention on the part of scientists and managers is already affecting the efficiency of workers. By the way, during the Hawthorne experiment, the Hawthorne effect was revealed, and the experiment itself raised the authority of psychological research as scientific methods.

Knowing about the results of the Hawthorne experiment, as well as about the effect, we can apply this knowledge in practice, namely: to have a positive impact on our activities and the activities of other people. Parents can improve the development of their children, educators can improve student achievement, employers can improve the efficiency of their employees and productivity. To do this, you can try to announce that a certain experiment will take place, and the people to whom you announce this are its important component. For the same purpose, you can apply the introduction of any innovation. But you can learn more about it here.

And you can find out the details of the Hawthorne experiment.

Milgram experiment

The Milgram experiment was first described by an American social psychologist in 1963. His goal was to find out how much suffering some people can cause to others, and innocent people, provided that this is their job duties. The participants in the experiment were told that they were studying the effect of pain on memory. And the participants were the experimenter himself, the real subject ("teacher") and the actor who played the role of another subject ("student"). The “student” had to memorize the words from the list, and the “teacher” had to check his memory and, in case of an error, punish him with an electric discharge, each time increasing its strength.

Initially, the Milgram experiment was carried out in order to find out how the inhabitants of Germany could take part in the destruction of a huge number of people during the Nazi terror. As a result, the experiment clearly demonstrated the inability of people (in this case, "teachers") to resist the boss (researcher), who ordered the "work" to continue, despite the fact that the "student" suffered. As a result of the experiment, it was revealed that the need to obey authorities is deeply rooted in the human mind, even under the condition of internal conflict and moral suffering. Milgram himself noted that under the pressure of authority, adequate adults are able to go very far.

If we think for a while, we will see that, in fact, the results of the Milgram 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 truly civilized, people must learn to always be guided by a human attitude towards each other, as well as ethical standards and moral principles dictated to them by their conscience, and not by the authority and power of other people.

You can get acquainted with the details of the Milgram experiment.

Stanford Prison Experiment

The Stanford Prison Experiment was conducted by American psychologist Philip Zimbardo in 1971 at Stanford. It explored a person's reaction to the conditions of imprisonment, the restriction of freedom and the impact on his behavior of an imposed social role. Funding was provided by the US Navy in order to explain the causes of conflicts in the Marine Corps and the Navy's correctional facilities. For the experiment, men were selected, some of whom became "prisoners", and the other part - "guards".

"Guards" and "prisoners" very quickly got used to their roles, and situations in a makeshift prison sometimes arose very dangerous. Sadistic inclinations were manifested in a third of the "guards", and the "prisoners" received severe moral injuries. The experiment, designed for two weeks, was stopped after six days, because. he started to get out of control. The Stanford prison experiment is often compared to the Milgram experiment we described above.

IN real life one can see how any justifying ideology supported by the state and society can make people overly receptive and submissive, and the power of authorities has a strong impact on the personality and psyche of a person. Watch yourself, and you will see visual confirmation of how certain conditions and situations affect your internal state and shape behavior more than the internal characteristics of your personality. It is very important to be able to always be yourself and remember your values ​​in order not to be influenced by external factors. And this can be done only with the help of constant self-control and awareness, which, in turn, need regular and systematic training.

Details of the Stanford Prison Experiment can be found by following this link.

Ringelmann experiment

The Ringelmann experiment (aka the Ringelmann effect) was first described in 1913 and carried out in 1927 by the 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 was carried out. different quantity people to do a specific job. In the first case, it was weight lifting, and in the second, tug of war.

One person could lift as much as possible, for example, a weight of 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 100% of which could be lifted alone. 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: an increase in the number of people reduced the percentage of efficiency.

It can be concluded that when we rely only on our own strengths, then we make maximum efforts to achieve the result, 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 makes us reflex to get the most out of ourselves, and 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 rely on the help of other people, because then you will give your best "to the fullest" and achieve your goal, and other people are not so important what is important to you.

More information about the Ringelmann experiment/effect can be found here.

Experiment "I and others"

"Me and Others" is a Soviet popular science film of 1971, which features footage of several psychological experiments, the course of which is commented on by the announcer. The experiments in the film reflect the influence of the opinions of others on a person and his ability to think out what he could not remember. All experiments were prepared and conducted by psychologist Valeria Mukhina.

Experiments shown in the film:

• "Attack": the subjects must describe the details of an impromptu attack and recall the signs of the attackers.
• "Scientist or killer": the subjects are shown a portrait of the same person, having previously presented him as a scientist or a killer. Participants must make psychological picture this man.
• “Both are 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 bowl is sweet, and one is salty. Three children are given porridge and they say it is sweet. The fourth is given a salty "site". Task: to check what the child who tasted the salty “plot” would call the porridge, when the other three say that it is sweet, thereby checking the importance 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 for one who came later, must say that two different photos This is a photo of the same person. The essence of the experiment is also to find out how the opinion of the majority affects the opinion of one.
• Shooting range: there are two targets in front of the student. If he shoots to the left, then a ruble will fall out, which he can take for himself, if to the right, then the ruble will go to the needs of the class. The left target initially had more hit marks. It is necessary to find out which target the student will shoot at if he sees that many of his comrades shot at the left target.

The overwhelming majority of the results of the experiments conducted in the film showed that for people (both for children and adults) what others say and their opinion is very important. So it is 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 lose ourselves among the rest. For this reason, many people do not achieve their goals, betray their dreams, follow the lead of the public. You need to be able to maintain your individuality in any conditions and always think only with your head. After all, first of all, it will serve you well.

By the way, in 2010 a remake of this film was made, in which the same experiments were presented. If you wish, you can find both of these films on the Internet.

"Monsterous" experiment

A monstrous experiment was conducted in 1939 in the United States by psychologist Wendell Johnson and his graduate student Mary Tudor in order to find out how susceptible children are to suggestion. For the experiment, 22 orphans from the city of Davenport were selected. They were divided into two groups. The children from the first group were told how wonderful and correct they were speaking, and they were praised in every possible way. The other half of the children were convinced that their speech was full of flaws, and they were called miserable stutterers.

The results of this monstrous experiment were also monstrous: in the majority of children from the second group, who did not have any speech defects, all the symptoms of stuttering began to develop and take root, which persisted throughout their later life. The experiment itself was hidden from the public for a very long time so as not to damage the reputation of Dr. Johnson. 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, sometimes you are amazed at how parents raise their children these days. You can often see how they scold their children, insult them, call them names, call them very unpleasant words. It is not surprising that people with a broken psyche and developmental disabilities grow out of young children. You need to understand that everything that we say to our children, and even more so if we say it often, will eventually find its reflection in their inner world and the formation of their personality. We need to carefully monitor everything that 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 able to become part of a normal and healthy society.

There is more information about the "monstrous" experiment.

Project "Aversion"

This terrible project was carried out from 1970 to 1989 in the South African army under the "leadership" of Colonel Aubrey Levin. It was a secret program designed to purge the ranks of the South African army from people of non-traditional sexual orientation. The "participants" of the experiment, according to official figures, were about 1,000 people, 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 castration with chemicals and sex reassignment surgery.

The Aversion project failed: it turned out to be impossible to change the sexual orientation of military personnel. And the “approach” itself was not based on any scientific evidence about homosexuality and transsexuality. Many of the victims of this project have never been able to rehabilitate themselves. Some committed suicide.

Of course, this project concerned only persons 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 "not like" the rest. Even the slightest manifestation of individuality can cause ridicule, hostility, misunderstanding and even aggression from the majority of "normal". Each person is an individuality, a personality with its own characteristics and mental properties. Inner world each 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 for who they are, regardless of their gender, religion, political or even sexual affiliation. Everyone has the right to be themselves.

More details about the Aversion project can be found at this link.

Landis experiments

Landis's experiments are also called Spontaneous Facial Expressions and Subordination. A series of these experiments was carried out by psychologist Carini Landis in Minnesota in 1924. The purpose of the experiment was to identify the 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 students of Landis.

For a more distinct display of facial expressions, special lines were drawn on the faces of the subjects. After that, they were presented with something capable of causing strong emotional experiences. For disgust, students sniffed ammonia, for excitement they watched pornographic pictures, for pleasure they listened to music, and so on. But the latest experiment, in which the subjects had to cut off the head of a rat, caused the widest resonance. And at first, many participants flatly refused to do it, but in the end they did it anyway. The results of the experiment did not reflect any regularity 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 what they normal conditions would never do.

It’s the same in life: when everything is fine and goes as it should, when everything goes on as usual, then we feel confident in ourselves as people, have our own opinion and preserve our individuality. But as soon as someone puts pressure on us, most of us immediately cease to be ourselves. Landis' 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 force us to do what we do not want. Especially if it entails causing harm to other living beings. If every person is aware of this, then it is quite likely that this will be able to make our world much more humane and civilized, and life in it - more comfortable and better.

You can learn more about Landis' experiments here.

Little Albert

An experiment called "Little Albert" or "Little Albert" was conducted in New York in 1920 by psychologist John Watson, who, by the way, is the founder of behaviorism - a special direction in psychology. The experiment was conducted in order to find out how fear is formed on objects that had not caused any fear before.

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 that, when the boy started playing with the rat again, the doctor would hit the metal with a hammer, causing the boy a very unpleasant feeling. 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 life. As for Albert, his unreasonable fear of a white rat remained with him for the rest of his life.

The results of the "Little Albert" experiment, firstly, remind us again how important it is to pay attention to any little things in the process of raising a child. Something that seems to us at first glance quite insignificant and overlooked, can in some strange way be reflected in the psyche of the child and develop into some kind of phobia or fear. When raising children, parents should 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, the cause of which we cannot find. It is quite possible that what we are unreasonably afraid of came to us from our own childhood. And how nice it can be to get rid of some fears that tormented or simply bothered in everyday life?!

You can learn more about the Little Albert experiment here.

Learned (learned) helplessness

Acquired helplessness is a mental state in which the individual does absolutely nothing to somehow improve his situation, even having such an opportunity. This state appears mainly after several unsuccessful attempts to influence the negative effects of the environment. As a result, a person refuses any action to change or avoid a harmful environment; the feeling of freedom and faith in one's own strength are lost; depression and apathy appear.

This phenomenon was first discovered in 1966 by two psychologists: Martin Seligman and Steve Mayer. They conducted experiments on dogs. The dogs were divided into three groups. The dogs from the first group sat in the cages for a while and were released. Dogs from the second group were subjected to small electric shocks, but were given the opportunity to turn off the electricity by pressing the lever with their paws. The third group was subjected to the same shocks, but without the possibility of turning it off. After some time, the dogs from the third group were placed in a special aviary, from which it was easy to 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 the scientists that the dogs developed "learned helplessness" and became confident that they were helpless before exposure. outside world. After the scientists concluded that the human psyche behaves in a similar way after several failures. But was it worth it to torture dogs in order to find out what, in principle, we all have known for so long?

Probably, many of us can recall examples of confirmation of what the scientists proved in the above experiment. Every person in life can have a losing streak 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 of character and fortitude. It is these moments that temper us and make us stronger. Some people say that this is how life tests strength. And if this test is passed steadfastly and with a proudly raised head, 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. one always replaces the other. Never lower your head and do not betray your dreams, they, as they say, will not 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 dawn.

You can read more about what is learned helplessness and about experiments related to this concept.

Boy raised like a girl

This experiment is one of the most inhuman in history. It, so to speak, was held from 1965 to 2004 in Baltimore (USA). In 1965, a boy named Bruce Reimer was born there, whose penis was damaged during a circumcision procedure. Parents, not knowing what to do, turned to psychologist John Money and he "recommended" them to simply change the sex of the boy and raise him as a girl. The parents followed the "advice", gave permission for the sex change operation and began to raise Bruce as Brenda. In fact, Dr. Mani has long wanted to conduct an experiment to prove that gender is due to upbringing, and not nature. The boy Bruce became his guinea pig.

Despite the fact that Mani noted in his reports that the child grows up as a full-fledged girl, parents and school teachers argued that, on the contrary, the child shows all the properties of a boy's character. Both the parents of the child and the child himself experienced extreme stress for many years. A few years later, Bruce-Brenda nevertheless decided to become a man: he changed his name and became David, changed his image and performed several operations to “return” to male physiology. He even got married and adopted his wife's children. But in 2004, after breaking up with his wife, David committed suicide. He was 38 years old.

What can be said about this "experiment" in relation to our Everyday life? Probably only that a person is born with a certain set of qualities and predispositions due to genetic information. Fortunately, not many people try to make daughters out of their sons or vice versa. But, nevertheless, while raising their child, some parents do not seem to want to notice the peculiarities of the character of their child and his emerging personality. They want to "sculpt" the child, as if from plasticine - to make him the way they themselves want to see him, without taking into account his individuality. And this is unfortunate, because. it is because of this that many people in adulthood feel their unfulfillment, frailty and meaninglessness of being, do not enjoy life. The small finds confirmation in the big, and any influence we have on children will be reflected in their future life. Therefore, it is worth being more attentive to your children and understanding that every person, even the smallest one, has his own path and you need to try with all your might to help him find it.

And some details of the life of David Reimer himself are here at this link.

The experiments considered by us in this article, as you might guess, represent only a small part of the total number ever carried out. But even they show us, on the one hand, how multifaceted and little studied the personality of a person and his psyche. And, on the other hand, what a great interest a person arouses in himself, and how much effort is made so that he can know his nature. Despite the fact that such a noble goal was often achieved by far from noble means, one can only hope that a person has somehow succeeded in his aspiration, and experiments that are harmful to a living being will cease to be carried out. We can say with confidence that it is possible and necessary to study the psyche and personality of a person for many more centuries, but this should be done only on the basis of considerations of humanism and humanity.

In 1965, an eight-month-old boy, Bruce Reimer, who was born in Winnipeg, Canada, underwent a circumcision on the advice of doctors. However, due to a mistake by the surgeon who performed the operation, the boy's penis was completely damaged.

1. The boy who was raised like a girl (1965-2004)

Psychologist John Money from Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore (USA), to whom the parents of the child turned for advice, advised them on a “simple” way out of a difficult situation: to change the sex of the child and raise him as a girl until he grew up and began to experience complexes according to about his male incompetence.

No sooner said than done: soon Bruce became Brenda. The unfortunate parents had no idea that their child was the victim of a cruel experiment: John Money had long been looking for an opportunity to prove that gender is due not to nature, but to upbringing, and Bruce became the ideal object of observation.

The boy's testicles were removed, and then for several years Mani published reports in scientific journals about the "successful" development of his experimental subject. “It is quite understandable that the child behaves like an active little girl and her behavior is strikingly different from the male behavior of her twin brother,” the scientist assured. However, both at home and teachers at school noted typical boy behavior and shifted perceptions in the child.

Worst of all, the parents, who hid the truth from their son-daughter, experienced great emotional stress. As a result, the mother was observed to have suicidal tendencies, the father became an alcoholic, and the twin brother was constantly depressed.

When Bruce-Brenda reached adolescence, he was given estrogen to stimulate breast growth, and then Mani began to insist on new operation, during which Brandy had to form the female genital organs. But then Bruce-Brenda rebelled. He flatly refused to do the operation and stopped coming to see Mani.

Three suicide attempts followed one after the other. The last of these ended in a coma for him, but he recovered and began the struggle to return to a normal existence - as a person. He changed his name to David, cut his hair and started wearing men's clothes. In 1997, he went through a series of reconstructive surgeries to restore physical signs of sex. He also married a woman and adopted her three children. However, the happy ending did not work out: in May 2004, after breaking up with his wife, David Reimer committed suicide at the age of 38.

2. "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 against it, Harlow took the child of the monkey from its mother and placed it in a cage all alone, and chose those cubs in which the connection with the mother was the strongest.

The monkey was kept in a cage for a year, after which it was released. Most individuals showed various mental abnormalities. scientist made following conclusions: even a happy childhood is not a defense against depression.

The results, to put it mildly, are not impressive: such a conclusion could be made without conducting cruel experiments on animals. However, the animal rights movement began after the publication of the results of this experiment.

3. Milgram experiment (1974)

Stanley Milgram's experiment from Yale University is described by the author in the book Submission to Authority: pilot study».

The experiment involved the experimenter, the 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 between the subject and the actor. In fact, the test subjects were always given the role of "teacher", and the hired actor was always the "student".

Before the start of the experiment, the "teacher" was explained that the purpose of the experiment was supposedly to reveal new methods of memorizing information. However, the experimenter investigated the behavior of a person who receives instructions from an authoritative source that are at odds with his internal behavioral norms.

The “apprentice” was tied to a chair to which a stun gun was attached. Both the “student” and the “teacher” received a “demonstration” electric shock of 45 volts. Then the “teacher” went to another room and had to give the “student” simple memory tasks via voice communication. Each time the student made a mistake, the subject had to press a button, and the student received a 45-volt electric shock. In fact, the actor who played the role of 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 to stop the experiment. The “teacher” began to doubt, and the experimenter replied: “The experiment requires you to continue. Please continue." The more the current increased, the more discomfort the actor showed. Then he howled in great pain and finally broke into a scream.

The experiment continued up to a voltage of 450 volts. If the "teacher" hesitated, the experimenter assured him that he took 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 shock of 450 volts, knowing that the "student" was in terrible pain. Contrary to all the preliminary predictions of the experimenters, most of the experimental 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 out of forty experimental subjects, not one stopped at a level of 300 volts, five refused to obey only after this level, and 26 “teachers » out of 40 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 meager office in the town of 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 summary results of all similar experiments showed that from 61% to 66% of "teachers" reach the end of the scale, regardless of the time and place of the experiment.

Terrible conclusions followed from the experiment: the unknown dark side of human nature tends not only to thoughtlessly obey authority and carry out unthinkable instructions, but also to justify its own behavior by the received “order”. Many participants in the experiment experienced an advantage over the "student" and, by pressing the button, were sure that he was getting what he deserved.

In general, the results of the experiment showed that the need to obey authority was so deeply rooted in our minds that the subjects continued to follow instructions, despite moral suffering and strong internal conflict.

4 Learned Helplessness (1966)

In 1966, psychologists Mark Seligman and Steve Mayer conducted a series of experiments on dogs. Animals were placed in cages, previously divided into three groups. The control group was released after some time without causing any harm, the second group of animals were subjected to repeated shocks that could be stopped by pressing a lever from the inside, and the animals of the third group were subjected to sudden shocks that could not be prevented in any way.

As a result, dogs have developed what is known as “acquired helplessness,” a reaction to unpleasant stimuli based on the belief that they are helpless in the face of the outside world. Soon, the animals began to show signs of clinical depression.

After some time, the dogs from the third group were released from their cages and placed in open enclosures from which it was easy to escape. Dogs re-exposed electric current However, none of them even thought about running away. Instead, they reacted passively to pain, accepting it as inevitable. The dogs had learned from previous negative experiences that escape was impossible and made no further 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 failures, going one after another. It is only unclear whether such a banal conclusion was worth the suffering of the unfortunate animals.

5. Baby Albert (1920)

John Watson, the founder of the behavioral trend in psychology, was engaged in research on the nature of fears and phobias. Studying the emotions of children, Watson, among other things, became interested in the possibility of forming a fear reaction to objects that had not previously caused it.

The scientist tested the possibility of forming an emotional reaction of fear of a white rat in a 9-month-old boy Albert, who was not afraid of rats at all and even liked to play with them. During the experiment, for two months, an orphan child from an orphanage was shown a tame white rat, a white rabbit, cotton wool, a Santa Claus mask with a beard, etc. After two months, the child was placed 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 her and calmly played with her. After a while, Watson began to beat with an iron hammer on a metal plate behind the child's back every time Albert touched the rat. After repeated blows, Albert began to avoid contact with the rat. A week later, the experiment was repeated - this time the plate was hit five times, simply by launching the rat into the cradle. The child cried when he saw the white rat.

After another five days, Watson decided to test whether the child would be afraid of similar objects. The boy was afraid of the white rabbit, cotton wool, the mask of Santa Claus. Since scientists did not make loud noises when showing objects, Watson concluded that fear reactions were transferred. He suggested that many of the fears, dislikes and anxiety states of adults are formed in early childhood.

Alas, Watson did not manage to deprive Albert of fear for no reason, which was fixed for life.

6 Landis Experiments: Spontaneous Facial Expressions and Subordination (1924)

In 1924 Karin Landis of the University of Minnesota began studying human facial expressions. The experiment, conceived by the scientist, was intended to reveal the general patterns of work of the facial muscle groups responsible for the expression of individual emotional states, and to find facial expressions typical of fear, confusion or other emotions (if we consider typical facial expressions characteristic of most people).

His students were the test subjects. To make facial expressions more expressive, he drew lines on the faces of the experimental subjects with cork soot, after which he showed them something that could evoke strong emotions: he made them sniff ammonia, listen to jazz, look at pornographic pictures and put their hands in buckets of frogs. At the moment of expressing emotions, students were photographed.

The latest test that Landis prepared for students outraged a wide circle of psychologists. Landis asked each subject to cut off the head of a white rat. All participants in the experiment initially refused to do this, many cried and screamed, but later most of them agreed. Worst of all, most of the participants in the experiment in life did not offend a fly and had absolutely no idea how to carry out the experimenter's order. 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 failed to find any regularity in facial expressions, however, psychologists received evidence of how easily people are ready to obey authority and do what is normal. life situation would not have done.

7. Study of the effect of drugs on the body (1969)

Admittedly, some experiments conducted on animals help scientists invent drugs that could later save tens of thousands. human lives. However, some studies cross all the boundaries of ethics.

An example is an experiment designed to help scientists understand the speed and extent of human addiction to drugs. The experiment was carried out on rats and monkeys as animals that are physiologically closest to humans. Animals were trained to inject themselves with a dose of a certain drug: morphine, cocaine, codeine, amphetamine, etc. As soon as the animals learned to "inject" themselves, the experimenters left them a large number of drugs 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. The monkeys who took cocaine began to suffer from convulsions and hallucinations: the unfortunate animals pulled out their knuckles. The monkeys, who were "sitting" on amphetamine, pulled out all the hair from themselves. Animals-"drugs", which preferred "cocktail" of cocaine and morphine, died within 2 weeks after starting the drugs.

While the purpose of the experiment was to understand and evaluate the effects of drugs on the human body with the intent to further develop effective drug addiction treatment, the way the results are achieved is hardly humane.

8 Stanford Prison Experiment (1971)

The "artificial prison" experiment was not meant to be unethical or harmful to the psyche of the participants, but the results of this study shocked the public.

famous psychologist Philip Zimbardo decided to study the behavior and social norms of individuals who find themselves in atypical prison conditions and are forced to play the roles of prisoners or guards. To do this, an imitation prison was set up in the basement of the Faculty of Psychology, and student volunteers (24 people) were divided into “prisoners” and “guards”. It was assumed that the "prisoners" were placed in a situation where they would experience personal disorientation and degradation, up to complete depersonalization. The "guards" 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". Since then, the behavior of both sides has changed radically. The "guards" have developed a special system of privileges, designed to separate the "prisoners" and sow distrust in each other - they are not as strong alone as together, which means they are easier to "guard". It began to seem to the "guards" that the "prisoners" were ready to raise a new "uprising" at any moment, and the control system was tightened to the limit: the "prisoners" were not left alone with them even in the toilet.

As a result, the "prisoners" began to experience emotional distress, depression, and helplessness. After some time, the "prison priest" came to visit the "prisoners". When asked what their names were, the “prisoners” most often gave their numbers, not their names, and the question of how they were going to get out of prison baffled them.

It turned out that the “prisoners” completely got used to their roles and began to feel like they were in a real prison, and the “guards” felt real sadistic emotions and intentions regarding the “prisoners”, who had been their good friends a few days before. 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 after six days for ethical reasons.

9. Project Aversion (1970)

In the South African army, from 1970 to 1989, a secret program was carried out to clean up the military ranks from military personnel of non-traditional sexual orientation. All means were used: from electroshock treatment to chemical castration.
The exact number of victims is unknown, however, according to army doctors, during the "purges" about 1,000 military personnel were subjected to various prohibited experiments on human nature. Army psychiatrists, on behalf of the command, "eradicated" homosexuals with might and main: those who were not subjected to "treatment" were sent to shock therapy, forced to take hormonal drugs, and even forced to undergo sex change operations.

The third wave is a psychological experiment conducted by history teacher Ron Jones on American high school students. In early April 1967, Jones spent a week in a Palo Alto school class trying to make sense of the behavior of the German people under repressive National Socialism. Having established strict rules for schoolchildren and becoming the creator of a youth group, he, to his surprise, did not meet resistance from either students or adults. On the fifth day, Jones stopped the experiment, explaining to the students how easily they are manipulated, and that their obedient behavior these days is not fundamentally different from the actions of ordinary citizens of the Third Reich.

Experiment

Ron Jones taught history at high school Ellwood Cubberle in Palo Alto, California. While studying World War II, one of the schoolchildren asked Jones how ordinary Germans could pretend not to know anything about concentration camps and mass extermination of people in their country. Since the class was ahead curriculum, Jones decided to allocate one week for an experiment dedicated to this issue.

On Monday, he explained to the students the power of discipline. Jones told the students to sit in the "at attention" position, as it is more conducive to learning. Then he ordered the students to stand up and sit down several times in a new position, then he also repeatedly ordered them to leave the audience and silently enter and take their seats. The students liked the “game” and they willingly followed the instructions. Jones told the students to answer questions clearly and vividly, and they obeyed with interest, even the usually passive students.

On Tuesday, Jones explained the power of community to a class that had sat down on their own. He had the students chant in unison: "Strength in discipline, strength in community." The disciples acted with obvious enthusiasm, seeing the strength of their group. At the end of the lesson, Jones showed the students the salute they were supposed to use when meeting each other - a raised bent right hand to the shoulder - and called this gesture the Third Wave salute. In the following days, the students regularly greeted each other with this gesture.
On Wednesday, 13 more students volunteered to join the 30 students in the experimental class, and Jones decided to issue membership cards. He talked about the power of action. According to him, individual rivalry is often frustrating, while group activities lead to greater learning success. Jones told the students to work together to design a Third Wave banner, convince twenty children from a neighboring elementary school in the correct landing "quietly" and name one reliable schoolboy who could join the experiment. Three students were given the task of reporting to Jones on violations of the established order and criticism of the Third Wave, but in practice about 20 people volunteered to report. One of the students, Robert, who was distinguished by a large physique and low learning abilities, told Jones that he would be his bodyguard, and followed him throughout the school. The three most successful students of the class, whose abilities were not in demand in the new conditions, informed their parents about the experiment. As a result, Jones received a phone call from a local rabbi, who was satisfied with the answer that the class was studying the German personality type in practice. The rabbi promised to explain everything to the parents of the schoolgirls. Jones was extremely frustrated by the lack of resistance even from the adults, the principal of the school greeted him with the salute of the Third Wave.

On Thursday morning, the audience was trashed by the father of one of the students, who was waiting for Jones in the hallway. He was not himself, explained his behavior by the German captivity and asked to understand him. Jones, who was trying to speed up the completion of the experiment, explained to the students the power of pride. 80 schoolchildren gathered in the class heard that they are part of a nationwide youth program whose task is political transformation for the benefit of the people. Jones ordered four escorts to escort three girls from the auditorium and escort them to the library, whose loyalty was questionable. He then said that hundreds of Third Wave chapters had been set up in other regions of the country, and that the movement's leader and new presidential candidate would announce their creation on television at noon on Friday.

On Friday afternoon, 200 students crowded into the classroom, including representatives of youth subcultures who were not interested in school affairs in principle. Jones' friends posed as photographers as they circled the audience. At noon, the TV was turned on, but nothing appeared on the screen. Seeing the bewilderment of the schoolchildren, Jones admitted that the movement does not exist, and the students abandoned their own opinions and easily succumbed to manipulation. According to him, their actions did not differ much from the behavior of the German people in the critical years. Schoolchildren dispersed in a depressed state, many could not hold back their tears.

Consequences

The experiment was spontaneous and for a long time remained unknown to the general public, which was facilitated by the shame of its participants for their actions. In the late 1970s, Jones published the history of the experiment in his pedagogical book. In 1981, the novel and television movie The Wave, based on the experiment, was released. In 2008, the heavily dramatized German film Experiment 2: The Wave was released.

• Size: 1.9 MB
• Number of slides: 21

Description of the presentation Bioethics and issues of biomedical experiments on humans. by slides

"Butugynchag" - "Valley of Death"

Documents governing the conduct of medical experiments The Nuremberg Code is the first ever international “Code of Rules for Conducting Experiments on Humans” 1. The voluntary consent of the subject is absolutely necessary. 2. The experiment should bring fruitful results that are unattainable with the help of other methods and means. 3. Such an experiment should be organized and based on preliminary experiments on animals. 4. The experiment must be designed in such a way as to exclude all unnecessary physical and mental suffering or injury. 5. No experiment should be conducted where there is a priori reason to believe that death or mutilation may occur. 6. You can not take risks where the problem under study is not too important for humanity. 7. Appropriate precautions are necessary to protect those who participate in the experiment from the possibility of injury, death and incapacity. 8. The experiment should be carried out only by qualified specialists. 9. During the experiment, the subject must have the right to stop the experiment at any time. 10. During the experiment, the researcher must be ready at any time to terminate the experiment if, in his opinion, the continuation of the latter may lead to injury, incapacity or death of the subject.

Documents governing the conduct of medical experiments 1954 - Principles of Conduct for Researchers and Principles for Conducting Experiments (World Medical Association (WMA) 1964 - Declaration of Helsinki (World Medical Assembly) 1971 - Principles of Medical Ethics of the American Medical Association (AMA) 1974 - Directive of the Department of Health, Education and Welfare (DHEW) 1996 - Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine "of the Council of Europe

“Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine” of the Council of Europe In the field of the human genome: genetic testing is allowed only for therapeutic purposes; intervention in the human genome can only be carried out for preventive, therapeutic or diagnostic purposes. In the field of embryonic research: the creation of human embryos for research purposes is prohibited. In the field of transplantology: organ retrieval from living donors can be carried out only with their consent and exclusively for the treatment of the recipient; the human body and its parts should not serve as a source of financial gain. The Additional Protocol to the 1997 Convention proclaims a ban on human cloning.

Documents regulating the conduct of medical experiments 1. The Constitution of the Russian Federation: article 21 “... No one can be subjected to medical, scientific or other tests without voluntary consent”, 2. Fundamentals of the legislation of the Russian Federation on the protection of the health of citizens article 32 “A necessary precondition for medical intervention is the informed voluntary consent of the citizen. article 43 “Biomedical research is allowed in institutions of the state and municipal health care system ... must be based on a preliminary laboratory experiment ... can be carried out after obtaining the written consent of a citizen” . 3. Federal Law "On Medicines" of 1998

The moral principle of experimentation The moral principle embodied in the documents states that every person has the right to decent treatment, this right belongs to everyone and cannot be canceled by any considerations of public benefit, contribution to the general welfare or progress in medical sciences.

The concept of "informed participant in the experiment" Consent is a general commandment for all codes relating to human experimentation. About the definition of the concept of "informed patient" or "informed participant in the experiment" is problematic.

Informed consent of the participant in the experiment Russia When consent is obtained, the citizen must be provided with information about the goals, methods, side effects, possible risks, duration and expected results of the study. A citizen has the right to refuse to participate in the study at any stage. USA honest story about the follow-up actions and their goals, including a clear explanation of which actual procedures are experimental. A description of the associated inconvenience and the anticipated - within reasonable - risk. A description of those useful results that - within reasonable limits - should be expected. You can not hide other - alternative - procedures that may be more favorable for the subject. Willingness to answer all procedural questions. The subject must be informed that he is free to revoke his consent and withdraw from the experiment at any time without detriment to himself.

Types of medical experiments on humans self-experimentation; experiments on volunteer patients, the purpose of which is to help the patient (experimental therapy); experiment on patients when it comes to the benefit of all patients in general; experiments on healthy people.

Self-experimentation of physicians Jacques Ponto: proof of the effectiveness of the serum from the bite of vipers. Smith: worked out a dose of curare that is not fatal to humans. Werner Forsman: approbation of methods for diagnosing congenital heart defects. Alain Bombard: the limits of survival in extreme situations E. Ulman: trials of rabies vaccine; I. G. Savchenko, P. G. Stasevich, A. M. Leontovich - inactivated cholera vaccine with subsequent intake of a culture of cholera vibrio; S. K. Derzhgovsky, V. P. Boldyrev y - immunizing effect of active diphtheria toxin; G. N. Gabrichevsky - inactivated anti-scarlet fever vaccine; Sh. Nicole and N. F. Gamaleya - a vaccine against typhus.

Experiments on Patients Problems: the paternalistic model of communication with the doctor being accepted by a wide range of patients without alternative, the patient regards the refusal of offers to the doctor as a refusal to help. The risk of not receiving proper treatment significantly influences an informed, objective choice. the doctor and the patient regard the refusal as a doubt in the competence of the doctor. the patient, not understanding the true nature of his disease, the proposed therapy, equates research with treatment.

Experiments on healthy people The stages of experiments in pharmacology are: 1. toxicity, safe dose, obvious side effects, etc. are determined. This stage requires the involvement of a large number of normal healthy people in the study with strict control over their living conditions (such requirements are met, for example, soldiers and prisoners). 2. to a limited number of patients suffering from the disease for which this medicine is intended to treat. 3. carried out at the clinic level. to a large number patients are given an experimental drug to evaluate its efficacy, safety, and optimal dose.

Participation in the experiments of persons in public institutions or service. Arguments for: 1. Prisoners are the largest pool of potential test subjects 2. Evenness of living conditions Arguments against: 1. Doubts about the authenticity of consent without any overt or covert violence; 2. Opportunities for abuse when control over the experiment is not available to the public.

Children's Participation in Experiments Problems of Obtaining “Informed Consent” Therapeutic Experiment: Parents may consent to participation in an experiment for the child if the treatment is for the good and benefit of the child. Non-therapeutic experiment: The child must be at least fourteen years of age, independent thinker and mature enough to understand the nature of the procedure to be performed, including potential dangers, and there must be no violence or call for duty. If these conditions are met, the child's consent - with the consent of the parents or guardians - is in accordance with international law.

"Blue blood" - Perftoran. Blood transfusion. The invention of blood substitutes. Perftoran is a blood substitute with a gas transport function that has hemodynamic, rheological, membrane stabilizing, cardioprotective, diuretic and sorption properties. Felix Fedorovitch Beloyartsev (1941 - 1985). Soviet anesthesiologist, pharmacologist, best known for his work on the creation of a blood substitute - perftoran. Doctor of Medical Sciences, Professor. Laureate of the Prize "Vocation-2002" (posthumously). Perftoran is a perfluorocarbon infusion emulsion

The Solaris Experiment In the novel famous writer- science fiction writer S. Lem "Solaris" the main character, astronaut-psychologist Chriss Kelvin arrives with an inspection purpose on space station, which is in orbit of an unusual ("intelligent") "planet" - Solaris. This "planet" materializes the memories of the protagonist, psychologist Kelvin, about his wife Hari, who died tragically (suicide as a result of a family quarrel) many years ago, and creates her copy-model. This copy-model feels like the person it is a copy of (experiences human emotions: loves, suffers, etc.). Main character novel, understanding, like a scientist, that this “guest” is not a person in the usual sense, nevertheless, psychologically perceives the “guest” as his ex-wife, whose death is partially on his conscience. With his fellow scientist Snaut, he discusses the problem of the possibility of applying harsh research methods to such "guests" (up to and including possible destruction).

Assignment on Solaris 1. By what criteria can/cannot apply "hard" methods of research in relation to such "guests"? can | 2. Compare the criteria you propose with the rules for conducting biomedical research specified in international documents (for example, the Nuremberg Code)?

Solaris Assignment Own Criteria Nuremberg Code 1. Voluntary consent of the subject is absolutely required. 2. The experiment should bring fruitful results that are unattainable with the help of other methods and means. 3. Such an experiment should be organized and based on preliminary experiments on animals. 4. The experiment must be designed in such a way as to exclude all unnecessary physical and mental suffering or injury. 5. No experiment should be conducted where there is a priori reason to believe that death or mutilation may occur. 6. You can not take risks where the problem under study is not too important for humanity. 7. Appropriate precautions are necessary to protect those who participate in the experiment from the possibility of injury, death and incapacity. 8. The experiment should be carried out only by qualified specialists. 9. During the experiment, the subject must have the right to stop the experiment at any time. 10. During the experiment, the researcher must be ready at any time to terminate the experiment if, in his opinion, the continuation of the latter may lead to injury, incapacity or death of the subject.