The worst psychological experiments in human history. Monstrous Experiment Monstrous Experiment

A monstrous experiment - it was inherently monstrous, and it was conducted in 1939 by the psychologist Wendell Johnson and his graduate student Mary Tudor in the United States of America. The purpose of the experiment was to find out to what extent children are susceptible to suggestion.
The process of the experiment itself is quite simple - for the purpose of the experiment, 22 orphans from the city of Davenport were selected. The children were randomly divided into two groups. The first group (more precisely, the children from this group) were constantly told how correctly, how wonderful they spoke, and at the same time they praised them in every possible way. The children from the second group were persistently convinced that they were speaking incorrectly, their speech was full of all sorts of shortcomings, and they called, no less, these children are pathetic stutterers.
Perhaps, because the children were orphans, there were no people so interested who would intervene in time and stop the shocking experiment at the very beginning.
And if the guys from the first group expected only positive emotions, then the children who got into the second group experienced constant discomfort - graduate student Mary Tudor was quite sarcastic, blasphemously ridiculing even the smallest deviations in their children's speech. At the same time, she performed her duties very conscientiously and did not skimp on using the most juicy epithets in her speech.
It is not surprising that children, systematically subjected to verbal bullying, experiencing public humiliation from a more adult and authoritative person, began to come into contact with others in a problematic way. These children began to show in large numbers previously absent complexes. One of the most striking manifestations was speech inhibition, after which graduate student Mary Tudor began to call the children from the second group miserable stutterers.
Children who were unlucky enough to be in the ill-fated second group had never before experienced absolutely no speech problems, however, as a result of the described experiment, not only formed, but also developed vivid symptoms of stuttering. And, unfortunately, these symptoms persisted throughout their lives after the experiment.
Those who conducted this monstrous experiment - the scientist Wendell Johnson and his graduate student Mary Tudor - wanted to confirm in practice the theory that psychological pressure affects the speech of children, causing a delay speech development and causing symptoms of stuttering. The experiment lasted quite a long time - six long months.
For obvious reasons, the described experiment was hidden from the public for a long time. Publicity about its conduct would inevitably affect Wendell Johnson's reputation as a scientist and as a person. But even though it sounds trite, everything secret becomes clear, late or early. Today this experiment is known as the "Monstrous Experiment".
Many years have passed since the monstrous experiment was carried out. And only in 2001, the details of this study were described in one of the California newspapers, based on the recollections of one of the participants in this monstrous experiment. Iowa State University has made an official apology to all those affected.
Then the events developed as follows - in 2003, six people filed a lawsuit, demanding financial compensation, since as a result of the actions carried out on them, their psyche suffered to a large extent. The Iowa attorney general ordered five plaintiffs to pay $ 900,000 and another $ 25,000. Whether this money was actually received by the plaintiffs, at the moment there is no reliable information about this.
Psychology-best.ru hopes that this article will force parents and adults to carefully weigh the words they say to children, remembering the results of a monstrous experiment.

Research ethics have been updated since the end of World War II. In 1947, the Nuremberg Code was developed and adopted, which protects the well-being of research participants to the present day. However, before, scientists did not disdain to experiment on prisoners, slaves and even members of their own families, violating all human rights. This list contains the most shocking and unethical cases.

10. Stanford Prison Experiment

In 1971, a team of scientists at Stanford University, led by psychologist Philip Zimbardo, conducted a study of human reactions to restriction of freedom in prison conditions. As part of the experiment, volunteers were to play the roles of guards and inmates in the basement of the psychology faculty building, equipped as a prison. The volunteers quickly got used to their duties, however, contrary to the forecasts of scientists, terrible and dangerous incidents began to occur during the experiment. A third of the "guards" showed pronounced sadistic tendencies, while many "prisoners" were psychologically traumatized. Two of them had to be excluded from the experiment ahead of time. Zimbardo, worried about the subjects' antisocial behavior, was forced to stop the study ahead of schedule.

9. Monstrous experiment

In 1939, a graduate student at the University of Iowa, Mary Tudor, under the guidance of psychologist Wendell Johnson, staged an equally shocking experience on the orphans of the Davenport orphanage. The experiment was devoted to the study of the influence of value judgments on the fluency of children's speech. The subjects were divided into two groups. During the training of one of them, Tudor gave positive marks and praised in every possible way. She subjected the speech of children from the second group to harsh criticism and ridicule. The experiment ended in failure, which is why it later got its name. Many healthy children did not recover from their trauma and suffered from speech problems throughout their lives. It was not until 2001 that a public apology for the Monstrous Experiment was made by the University of Iowa.

8. Project 4.1

The medical research, known as Project 4.1, was carried out by US scientists on Marshall Islanders who became victims of radioactive contamination after the explosion of the US Castle Bravo thermonuclear device in the spring of 1954. In the first 5 years after the disaster on Rongelap Atoll, the number of miscarriages and stillbirths doubled, and the surviving children developed developmental disabilities. Over the next decade, many of them developed thyroid cancer. By 1974, a third had developed neoplasms. As experts later concluded, the purpose of the medical program to help local residents of the Marshall Islands turned out to be their use as guinea pigs in a "radioactive experiment."

7. MK-ULTRA project

The CIA's secret Mind manipulation program, MK-ULTRA, was launched in the 1950s. The essence of the project was to study the influence of various psychotropic substances on human consciousness. The participants in the experiment were doctors, military personnel, prisoners and other representatives of the US population. The subjects, as a rule, did not know that they were injected with drugs. One of the CIA's covert operations was called "Midnight Climax". In several San Francisco brothels, male test subjects were selected, injected with LSD, and then filmed on video intended for study. The project lasted until at least the 1960s. In 1973, the CIA leadership destroyed most of the MK-ULTRA documents, causing significant difficulties in the subsequent investigation of the case by the US Congress.

6. Project "Aversia"

From the 70s to the 80s of the XX century, an experiment was conducted in the South African army aimed at changing the gender of soldiers with non-traditional sexual orientation. In the course of the top-secret Operation Aversia, about 900 people were injured. The alleged homosexuals were calculated by army doctors with the assistance of priests. In a military psychiatric ward, subjects were subjected to hormone therapy and electroshock. If the soldiers could not be "cured" in this way, they would face forced chemical castration or sex reassignment surgery. Aversion was run by psychiatrist Aubrey Levin. In the 90s, he immigrated to Canada, not wanting to face trial for the atrocities he had committed.

5. Experiments on humans in North Korea

North Korea has repeatedly been accused of researching prisoners who violate human rights, however, the country's government denies all charges, claiming that the state treats them humanely. However, one of the former prisoners told the shocking truth. A terrible, if not terrifying experience appeared before the eyes of the prisoner: 50 women, under the threat of reprisals against their families, were forced to eat poisoned cabbage leaves and died, suffering from bloody vomiting and rectal bleeding, accompanied by the screams of other victims of the experiment. There is eyewitness testimony about special laboratories equipped for experiments. Whole families became their targets. After a routine medical examination, the wards were sealed and filled with asphyxiant gas, and the "researchers" watched through the glass from above as parents tried to rescue their children by giving them artificial respiration for as long as they had strength.

4. Toxicological laboratory of the special services of the USSR

A top-secret scientific unit, also known as "Kamera", under the leadership of Colonel Mairanovsky was engaged in experiments in the field of toxic substances and poisons such as ricin, digitoxin and mustard gas. Experiments were carried out, as a rule, on prisoners sentenced to capital punishment. Poisons were served to the subjects under the guise of drugs along with food. The main goal of the scientists was to find an odorless and tasteless toxin that would not leave traces after the death of the victim. Ultimately, scientists were able to find the desired poison. According to eyewitness accounts, after taking C-2, subject became weaker, quiet, as if cringing and dying within 15 minutes.

3. Research on Tuskegee's syphilis

The infamous experiment began in 1932 in the Alabama city of Tuskegee. For 40 years, scientists literally refused to treat syphilis to patients in order to study all stages of the disease. The victims of the experience were 600 poor African American sharecroppers. The patients were not informed about their illness. Instead of a diagnosis, doctors told people they had "bad blood" and offered free food and treatment in exchange for participating in the program. During the experiment, 28 men died from syphilis, 100 from subsequent complications, 40 infected their wives, 19 children received a congenital disease.

2. "Unit 731"

Japanese Special Squad armed forces under the leadership of Shiro Ishii were engaged in experiments in the field of chemical and biological weapons. In addition, they are responsible for the most terrifying experiences on people that history only knows. The military doctors of the detachment opened up living subjects, amputated the limbs of the captives and sewed them to other parts of the body, deliberately infecting men and women with sexually transmitted diseases through rape in order to further study the consequences. The list of atrocities of "Unit 731" is huge, but many of its employees have not been punished for their actions.

1. Experiments of the Nazis on people

Medical experiments carried out by the Nazis during World War II claimed a huge number of lives. In concentration camps, scientists performed the most sophisticated and inhuman experiments. At Auschwitz, Dr. Josef Mengele conducted research on over 1,500 pairs of twins. A variety of chemicals were injected into the subjects' eyes to see if their color changed, and in an attempt to create Siamese twins, the subjects were stitched. Meanwhile, Luftwaffe officers were trying to find a way to treat hypothermia, forcing prisoners to lie in icy water for several hours, and in the Ravensbrück camp, researchers deliberately inflicted wounds on prisoners and infected them with infections in order to test sulfonamides and other drugs.

The topic of experiments on people excites and causes a sea of ​​ambiguous emotions among scientists. Here is a list of 10 monstrous experiments that were carried out in different countries.

1. Stanford Prison Experiment

A study of the reactions of a person in captivity and the characteristics of his behavior in a position of power was carried out in 1971 by psychologist Philip Zimbardo at Stanford University. Volunteer students played the roles of guards and prisoners, living in the basement of the university in a prison-like setting. The newly minted inmates and guards quickly adapted to their roles, showing reactions not expected by the experimenters. A third of the "guards" showed genuine sadistic tendencies, while many of the "prisoners" were emotionally traumatized and extremely depressed. Zimbardo, alarmed by the outburst of violence among the "guards" and the depressing state of the "prisoners", was forced to stop the study ahead of schedule.

2. Monstrous experiment

Wendell Johnson of the University of Iowa, together with graduate student Mary Tudor, conducted an experiment in 1939 with the participation of 22 orphans. Having divided the children into two groups, they began to encourage and praise the fluency of speech of representatives of one of them, at the same time they spoke negatively about the speech of children from the second group, emphasizing its imperfection and frequent stuttering. Many of the normally speaking children who received negative comments during the experiment subsequently found psychological as well as real speech problems keeping some for life. Johnson's colleagues called his research "monstrous", horrified by the decision to experiment on orphans to prove the theory. In the name of preserving the reputation of the scientist, the experiment was hidden for many years, and the University of Iowa in 2001 made a public apology for it.

3. Project 4.1

Project 4.1 is the name of a medical study conducted in the United States among Marshall Islanders exposed to radioactive fallout in 1954. In the first decade after the trial, the results were mixed: the percentage of health problems in the population fluctuated widely, but still did not represent a clear picture. In the decades that followed, however, the evidence for the impact was overwhelming. Children began to suffer from thyroid cancer, and almost one in three of the toxic fallout in the area discovered the development of neoplasms by 1974.

The Committee's Department of Energy subsequently stated that it was highly unethical to use living people as "guinea pigs" in exposure to radioactive exposure, and experimenters should have sought to provide medical attention to victims instead.

4. MKULTRA project

Project MKULTRA or MK-ULTRA is the code name for the CIA's mind control research program in the 1950s and 1960s. There is ample evidence that the project involved the covert use of many types of drugs and other techniques to manipulate mental health and brain function.

The experiments included injecting LSD into CIA officers, military personnel, doctors, government officials, prostitutes, the mentally ill, and just plain ordinary people to study their reactions. The introduction of substances was carried out, as a rule, without the knowledge of the person.

In one experiment, the CIA set up several brothels in which visitors were injected with LSD, and the reactions were recorded using hidden cameras for later study.

In 1973, CIA Chief Richard Helms ordered the destruction of all MKULTRA documents, which was done, making an investigation into long-term experiments almost impossible.

5. Project "Disgust"

In the period from 1971 to 1989, in military hospitals in South Africa, as part of a top-secret program to eradicate homosexuality, about 900 soldiers of both sexes with non-traditional sexual orientation underwent a series of highly unethical medical experiments.

Army psychiatrists, with the help of priests, identified homosexuals in the ranks of soldiers, sending them to "correctional procedures." Those who could not be "cured" with medication were subjected to shock or hormone therapy, as well as other radical means, among which were chemical castration and even sex reassignment surgery.

The project leader, Dr. Aubrey Levine, is now a professor of the forensic department in the Department of Psychiatry at the University of Calgary.

6. North Korean experiments

There is ample evidence of human experimentation in North Korea. The reports show human rights abuses similar to those of the Nazis during World War II. However, all charges are denied by the North Korean government.

A former North Korean prison inmate recounts how fifty healthy women were ordered to eat poisoned cabbage despite the clearly audible cries of anguish from those who had already eaten it. All fifty people were dead after 20 minutes of bloody vomiting. Refusal to eat threatened to entail reprisals against women and their families.

Kwon Hyuk, a former prison warden, described laboratories equipped with poison gas equipment. People, usually families, were allowed into the cameras. The doors were sealed and gas was injected through a tube, while scientists watched the suffering of people through glass.

The Poison Laboratory is a secret base for the research and development of poisonous substances by Soviet secret services... A number of deadly poisons were tested on prisoners of the GULAG ("enemies of the people"). Mustard gas, ricin, digitoxin and many other gases were applied to them. The aim of the experiments was to find the formula chemical that cannot be found posthumously. Poison samples were administered to the victims with food or drink, and also under the guise of medicine. Finally, a drug was developed with the desired properties called C-2. According to the testimony of witnesses, the person who took this poison seemed to become shorter, rapidly weakened, quieted down and died within fifteen minutes.

8. Research on Tuskegee's Syphilis

A clinical study conducted from 1932 to 1972 in Tuskegee, Alabama, involving 399 people (plus 201 controls), aimed to examine the course of syphilis. The test subjects were mostly illiterate African Americans.

The study became famous for the lack of proper conditions for the experimental subjects, which led to changes in the policy of attitudes towards participants in scientific experiments in the future. Those who took part in the Tuskegee Study were not aware of their own diagnosis: they were only told that the problems were caused by "bad blood", and they could receive free medical care, transportation to the clinic, food and burial insurance in case of death in exchange to participate in the experiment. In 1932, when the study began, standard treatments for syphilis were highly toxic and of questionable efficacy. Part of the scientists' goal was to determine if patients would not get better without taking these toxic drugs. Many test subjects received placebo instead of medication so that scientists could monitor the progression of the disease.

By the end of the study, only 74 subjects were still alive. Twenty-eight men died directly from syphilis, 100 - due to complications of the disease were dead. Among their wives, 40 were infected, 19 children in their families were born with congenital syphilis.

9. Block 731

Unit 731 is a secret biological and chemical military research unit of the Imperial Japanese Army that carried out deadly experiments on humans during the Sino-Japanese War and World War II.

Some of the many experiments carried out by Commander Shiro Ishii and his staff at Block 731 included vivisection of living people (including pregnant women), amputation and freezing of prisoners' limbs, testing of flamethrowers and grenades on live targets. People were injected with strains of pathogens and studied the development of destructive processes in their bodies. Many, many atrocities were carried out within the framework of the Block 731 project, but its leader, Ishii, received immunity from the American occupation authorities in Japan at the end of the war, did not spend a day in prison for his crimes and died at the age of 67 from laryngeal cancer.

10. Nazi experiments

The Nazis claimed that their experiences in concentration camps during World War II were aimed at helping German soldiers in combat situations, and also served to promote the ideology of the Third Reich.

Experiments with children in concentration camps were carried out to show the similarities and differences in the genetics and eugenics of twins, and to ensure that the human body can be subject to a wide range of manipulations. The head of the experiments was Dr. Josef Mengele, who conducted experiments on more than 1,500 groups of twin prisoners, of which less than 200 people survived. The twins were injected and their bodies were literally stitched together in an attempt to create a "Siamese" configuration.

In 1942, the Luftwaffe conducted experiments to clarify how to treat hypothermia. In one study, a person was placed in a tank of ice water for up to three hours (see figure above). Another study involved leaving prisoners naked outside in sub-zero temperatures. The experimenters evaluated various methods of rewarming the survivors.

Psychology as a science gained popularity at the beginning of the twentieth century. The noble goal - to learn more about the intricacies of human behavior, perception, emotional state - was not always achieved by equally noble means. Psychologists and psychiatrists who were at the origin of many branches of the science of human psyche, conducted such experiments on humans and animals that can hardly be called humane or ethical. Here are a dozen of them:

"Monstrous Experiment" (1939)

In 1939, Wendell Johnson of the University of Iowa (USA) and his graduate student Mary Tudor conducted a shocking experiment involving 22 orphans from Davenport. The children were divided into control and experimental groups. The experimenters told half of the children how cleanly and correctly they spoke. Unpleasant moments awaited the second half of the children: Mary Tudor, sparing no epithets, sarcastically ridiculed the slightest flaw in their speech, eventually calling everyone pitiful stutterers.

As a result of the experiment, many children who have never experienced problems with speech and by the will of fate ended up in the "negative" group, developed all the symptoms of stuttering that persisted throughout their lives. The experiment, later called "monstrous", was hidden from the public for a long time for fear of damaging Johnson's reputation: similar experiments were later carried out on prisoners of concentration camps in Nazi Germany. In 2001, the University of Iowa made an official apology to all those affected by the study.

Project "Aversia" (1970)

In the South African army, from 1970 to 1989, a secret program was carried out to cleanse the army ranks of military personnel of non-traditional sexual orientation. All means 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 soldiers were subjected to various prohibited experiments on human nature. Army psychiatrists on behalf of the command with might and main "eradicated" homosexuals: those who did not respond to "treatment" were sent to shock therapy, forced to take hormonal drugs and even subjected to sex reassignment surgery.

In most cases, the "patients" were young white males between the ages of 16 and 24. The then head of the "study," Dr. Aubrey Levin, is now a professor of psychiatry at the University of Calgary, Canada. He is engaged in private practice.

Stanford Prison Experiment (1971)

In 1971, the experiment with the "artificial prison" was not conceived by its creator as something unethical or harmful to the psyche of its participants, but the results of this study shocked the public. The famous psychologist Philip Zimbardo decided to study the behavior and social norms of individuals placed in atypical prison conditions and forced to play the role of prisoners or guards.

To do this, a simulated prison was equipped in the basement of the Faculty of Psychology, and 24 student volunteers were divided into “prisoners” and “guards”. It was assumed that the "prisoners" were initially placed in a situation during which they would experience personal disorientation and degradation, up to complete depersonalization.

The "overseers" were not given any special instructions regarding their roles. At first, the students did not really understand how they should play their roles, but on the second day of the experiment everything fell into place: the uprising of the "prisoners" was brutally suppressed by the "guards." From that moment on, the behavior of both sides changed radically.

"Overseers" developed special system privileges, designed to separate the "prisoners" and instill in them mistrust of each other - individually they are not as strong as together, which means that they are easier to "protect". The “guards” began to think that the “prisoners” were ready to start a new “uprising” at any moment, and the control system was tightened to an extreme degree: the “prisoners” were not left alone even in the toilet.

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

To the horror of the experimenters, it turned out that the "prisoners" absolutely got used to their roles and began to feel like they were in a real prison, and the "guards" experienced real sadistic emotions and intentions towards the "prisoners" who had been their good friends a few days ago. Both sides seemed to have completely forgotten that this was all just an experiment. Although the experiment was scheduled for two weeks, it was terminated early, just six days later for ethical reasons. Based on this experiment, Oliver Hirschbiegel directed The Experiment (2001).

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

It should be recognized that some experiments carried out on animals are helping scientists to invent drugs that could later save tens of thousands of human lives. However, some research goes beyond the boundaries of ethics. An example is the 1969 experiment designed to help scientists understand the rate and extent of a person's addiction to drugs.

The experiment was carried out on rats and monkeys, as on animals closest to humans in physiology. The animals were taught to inject themselves a dose of a certain drug: morphine, cocaine, codeine, amphetamines, etc. As soon as the animals learned to "inject" on their own, the experimenters left them a large number of drugs, left the animals on their own and began to observe.

The animals were so confused that some of them even tried to escape, and, being under the influence of drugs, they were crippled and did not feel pain. Monkeys who took cocaine began to suffer from convulsions and hallucinations: the unfortunate animals pulled out their phalanges of their fingers. The monkeys, "sitting" on amphetamines, pulled out all their fur.

The "drug addicts" animals who preferred a "cocktail" of cocaine and morphine died within 2 weeks of starting the drug. Despite the fact that the purpose of the experiment was to understand and assess the degree of drug impact on the human body with the intention of further developing an effective drug addiction treatment, the ways to achieve results can hardly be called humane.

Landis's Experiments: Spontaneous Facial Expressions and Submission (1924)
In 1924, Carini Landis of the University of Minnesota began studying human facial expressions. The experiment started by the scientist was supposed to reveal general patterns the work of groups of facial muscles responsible for the expression of individual emotional states, and find facial expressions typical of fear, embarrassment or other emotions (if we consider the typical facial expressions characteristic of most people).

The test subjects were his own students. To make the facial expressions more distinct, he drew lines with a burnt cork on the subjects' faces, after which he presented them with something that could evoke strong emotions: he made them sniff ammonia, listen to jazz, look at pornographic pictures, and stick their hands in buckets of toads. At the moment of expressing emotions, the students were photographed.

And everything would be fine, but last test that Landis exposed students to, caused misinterpretation in the widest circles of psychologists. Landis asked each subject to cut off the head of a white rat. At first, all the participants in the experiment refused to do this, many cried and shouted, but later most of them agreed to do it. Worst of all, most of the participants in the experiment, as they say, in life did not offend the flies and did not at all imagine how to carry out the order of the experimenter.

As a result, the animals suffered a lot. The consequences of the experiment turned out to be much more important than the experiment itself. Scientists have not been able to find any regularity in facial expression, but psychologists have obtained evidence of how easily people are ready to obey authorities and do what is usual life situation would not have done.

Little Albert (1920)

John Watson, the father of the behavioral trend in psychology, has been researching the nature of fears and phobias. In 1920, while studying the emotions of infants, Watson, among other things, became interested in the possibility of forming a fear response in relation to objects that had not previously caused fear. The scientist tested the possibility of the formation of an emotional reaction of fear of a white rat in a 9-month-old boy Albert, who was not at all afraid of a rat and even loved to play with it.

During the experiment, for two months, an orphan baby from a shelter was shown a tame white rat, white rabbit, cotton wool, Santa Claus mask with a beard, etc. Two months later, the child was put on a rug in the middle of the room and allowed to play with the rat. At first, the child was not at all afraid of the rat and calmly played with it. After a while, Watson began to hit the metal plate behind the child's back with an iron hammer every time Albert touched the rat. After repeating the blows, Albert began to avoid contact with the rat.

A week later, the experiment was repeated - this time the strip was hit five times, simply by placing the rat in the cradle. The baby cried only at the sight of a white rat. After another five days, Watson decided to test whether the child would be afraid of similar objects. The child was afraid of a white rabbit, cotton wool, a Santa Claus mask. Because the loud sounds when showing objects the scientist did not publish, Watson concluded that the fear reactions were transferred. Watson suggested that many of the fears, antipathies, and anxiety states of adults are formed in early childhood. Unfortunately, Watson never managed to save baby Albert from his unreasonable fear, which was entrenched for the rest of his life.

Acquired helplessness (1966)

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

As a result, the dogs developed the so-called "acquired helplessness" - a reaction to unpleasant stimuli, based on the conviction of helplessness in front of the outside world. The animals soon began showing signs of clinical depression. After a while, the dogs from the third group were released from their cages and placed in open enclosures, from which it was easy to escape. Dogs exposed again electric current however, none of them even thought of running away. Instead, they reacted passively to pain, perceiving it as inevitable.

The dogs learned from previous negative experiences that escape was impossible and no longer made any attempts to escape from the cage. Scientists have suggested that the human response to stress is much like a dog's: people become helpless after several failures, one after the other. It is only unclear whether such a banal conclusion was worth the suffering of the unfortunate animals.

The Milgram Experiment (1974)

The 1974 experiment by Stanley Milgram of Yale University is described by the author in Submission to Authority: An Experimental Study. The experiment involved an experimenter, a subject, and an actor who played the role of another subject. At the beginning of the experiment, the roles of “teacher” and “student” were distributed “by lot” between the subject and the actor. In reality, the subject was always given the role of the "teacher", and the hired actor was always the "student".

Before the start of the experiment, the “teacher” was explained that the purpose of the experiment was supposedly to reveal new methods of memorizing information. In reality, the experimenter set out to investigate the behavior of a person who receives instructions that diverge from his internal behavioral norms from an authoritative source. The "student" was tied to a chair to which a stun gun was attached. Both the "student" and "teacher" received a "demonstration" electric shock of 45 volts.

Then the "teacher" went to another room and had to give the "student" simple tasks for memorization. For each student's mistake, the subject had to press a button, and the student received an electric shock of 45 volts. In reality, the actor playing the student only pretended to receive electric shocks. Then, after each mistake, the teacher had to increase the voltage by 15 volts. At some point, the actor began to demand that the experiment be stopped. The “teacher” began to doubt, and the experimenter replied to this: “The experiment requires that you continue. Please continue. "

As the tension increased, the actor acted out more and more discomfort, then severe pain, and finally broke into a scream. The experiment continued up to 450 volts. If the "teacher" hesitated, the experimenter assured him that he was taking full responsibility for the experiment and for the safety of the "student" and that the experiment should be continued.

The results were shocking: 65% of the "teachers" gave a 450 volt discharge, knowing that the "student" was in great pain. Contrary to all the preliminary forecasts of the experimenters, most of the subjects obeyed the instructions of the scientist who led the experiment and punished the "student" with an electric shock, and in a series of experiments of forty subjects, not one stopped to the level of 300 volts, five refused to obey only after this level, and 26 "teachers" from 40 have reached the end of the scale.

Critics said the subjects were hypnotized by the authority of Yale University. In response to this criticism, Milgram repeated the experiment, renting a squalid building in Bridgeport, Connecticut, under the banner of the Bridgeport Research Association. The results did not change qualitatively: 48% of the subjects agreed to reach the end of the scale. In 2002, the summary results of all similar experiments showed that 61% to 66% of “teachers” reach the end of the scale, regardless of the time and place of the experiment.

The conclusions from the experiment were the most frightening: the unknown dark side of human nature is inclined not only to mindlessly obey authority and carry out the most inconceivable instructions, but also to justify their own behavior with the received "order." Many participants in the experiment felt a sense of superiority over the "student" and, pressing the button, were sure that the "student" who answered the question incorrectly was getting what he deserved.

Ultimately, the results of the experiment showed that the need for obedience to authorities is so deeply rooted in our minds that the subjects continued to follow directions, despite mental suffering and intense internal conflict.

"The Source of Despair" (1960)

Harry Harlow conducted his cruel experiments on monkeys. In 1960, exploring the issue of social isolation of the individual and methods of protection from it, Harlow took a baby monkey from his mother and placed it in a cage all alone, and he chose those cubs who had the strongest connection with the mother. The monkey was kept in a cage for a year, after which it was released.

Most individuals showed various mental abnormalities. The scientist made the following conclusions: even a happy childhood is not a defense against depression. The results, to put it mildly, are not impressive: a similar conclusion could have been made without cruel experiments on animals. However, the movement in defense of animal rights began precisely after the publication of the results of this experiment.

Psychology as a science gained popularity at the beginning of the twentieth century. The noble goal - to learn more about the intricacies of human behavior, perception, emotional state - was not always achieved by equally noble means. Psychologists and psychiatrists, who stood at the origins of many branches of the science of the human psyche, conducted such experiments on humans and animals that can hardly be called humane or ethical. Here are a dozen of them:

"Monstrous Experiment" (1939)

In 1939, Wendell Johnson of the University of Iowa (USA) and his graduate student Mary Tudor conducted a shocking experiment involving 22 orphans from Davenport. The children were divided into control and experimental groups. The experimenters told half of the children how cleanly and correctly they spoke. Unpleasant moments awaited the second half of the children: Mary Tudor, sparing no epithets, sarcastically ridiculed the slightest flaw in their speech, eventually calling everyone pitiful stutterers.

As a result of the experiment, many children who have never experienced problems with speech and by the will of fate ended up in the "negative" group, developed all the symptoms of stuttering that persisted throughout their lives. The experiment, later called "monstrous", was hidden from the public for a long time for fear of damaging Johnson's reputation: similar experiments were later carried out on prisoners of concentration camps in Nazi Germany. In 2001, the University of Iowa made an official apology to all those affected by the study.

Project "Aversia" (1970)

In the South African army, from 1970 to 1989, a secret program was carried out to cleanse the army ranks of military personnel of non-traditional sexual orientation. All means were used: from electroshock treatment to chemical castration.

The exact number of victims is unknown, however, according to army doctors, about 1,000 soldiers were subjected to various prohibited experiments on human nature during the "purges". Army psychiatrists on behalf of the command with might and main "eradicated" homosexuals: those who did not respond to "treatment" were sent to shock therapy, forced to take hormonal drugs and even subjected to sex reassignment surgery.

In most cases, the "patients" were young white males between the ages of 16 and 24. The then head of the “study,” Dr. Aubrey Levine, is now Professor of Psychiatry at the University of Calgary, Canada. He is engaged in private practice.

Stanford Prison Experiment (1971)

In 1971, the experiment with the "artificial prison" was not conceived by its creator as something unethical or harmful to the psyche of its participants, but the results of this study shocked the public. The famous psychologist Philip Zimbardo decided to study the behavior and social norms of individuals placed in atypical prison conditions and forced to play the role of prisoners or guards.

To do this, a simulated prison was equipped in the basement of the Faculty of Psychology, and 24 student volunteers were divided into “prisoners” and “guards”. It was assumed that the "prisoners" were initially placed in a situation during which they would experience personal disorientation and degradation, up to complete depersonalization.

The "overseers" were not given any special instructions regarding their roles. At first, the students did not really understand how they should play their roles, but on the second day of the experiment everything fell into place: the uprising of the "prisoners" was brutally suppressed by the "guards." From that moment on, the behavior of both sides changed radically.

The “guards” have developed a special system of privileges designed to separate the “prisoners” and instill in them mistrust of each other - individually they are not as strong as together, which means that they are easier to “guard”. The “guards” began to think that the “prisoners” were ready to start a new “uprising” at any moment, and the control system was tightened to an extreme degree: the “prisoners” were not left alone even in the toilet.

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

To the horror of the experimenters, it turned out that the "prisoners" absolutely got used to their roles and began to feel like they were in a real prison, and the "guards" experienced real sadistic emotions and intentions towards the "prisoners" who had been their good friends a few days ago. Both sides seemed to have completely forgotten that this was all just an experiment. Although the experiment was scheduled for two weeks, it was terminated early, just six days later for ethical reasons. Based on this experiment, Oliver Hirschbiegel directed The Experiment (2001).

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

It should be recognized that some experiments carried out on animals are helping scientists to invent drugs that could later save tens of thousands of human lives. However, some research goes beyond the boundaries of ethics. An example is the 1969 experiment designed to help scientists understand the rate and extent of a person's addiction to drugs.

The experiment was carried out on rats and monkeys, as on animals closest to humans in physiology. The animals were taught to inject themselves a dose of a certain drug: morphine, cocaine, codeine, amphetamines, etc. As soon as the animals learned to "inject" on their own, the experimenters left them a large number of drugs, left the animals on their own and began to observe.

The animals were so confused that some of them even tried to escape, and, being under the influence of drugs, they were crippled and did not feel pain. Monkeys who took cocaine began to suffer from convulsions and hallucinations: the unfortunate animals pulled out their phalanges of their fingers. The monkeys, "sitting" on amphetamines, pulled out all their fur.

The "drug addicts" animals who preferred a "cocktail" of cocaine and morphine died within 2 weeks of starting the drug intake. Despite the fact that the purpose of the experiment was to understand and assess the degree of drug impact on the human body with the intention of further developing an effective drug addiction treatment, the ways to achieve results can hardly be called humane.

Landis's Experiments: Spontaneous Facial Expressions and Submission (1924)
In 1924, Carini Landis of the University of Minnesota began studying human facial expressions. The experiment started by the scientist was to reveal the general patterns of the work of groups of facial muscles responsible for the expression of individual emotional states, and find facial expressions typical of fear, embarrassment or other emotions (if we consider the typical facial expressions characteristic of most people).

The test subjects were his own students. To make the facial expressions more distinct, he drew lines with a burnt cork on the subjects' faces, after which he presented them with something that could evoke strong emotions: he made them sniff ammonia, listen to jazz, look at pornographic pictures, and shove their hands into buckets of toads. At the moment of expressing emotions, the students were photographed.

And all would be fine, but the last test that Landis subjected students to, caused misinterpretation in the widest circles of psychologists. Landis asked each subject to cut off the head of a white rat. At first, all the participants in the experiment refused to do this, many cried and shouted, but later most of them agreed to do it. Worst of all, most of the participants in the experiment, as they say, in life did not offend the flies and did not at all imagine how to carry out the order of the experimenter.

As a result, the animals suffered a lot. The consequences of the experiment turned out to be much more important than the experiment itself. Scientists have not been able to find any regularity in facial expression, but psychologists have received evidence of how easily people are ready to submit to authorities and do what they would not have done in an ordinary life situation.

Little Albert (1920)

John Watson, the father of the behavioral trend in psychology, has been researching the nature of fears and phobias. In 1920, while studying the emotions of infants, Watson, among other things, became interested in the possibility of forming a fear response in relation to objects that had not previously caused fear. The scientist tested the possibility of the formation of an emotional reaction of fear of a white rat in a 9-month-old boy Albert, who was not at all afraid of a rat and even loved to play with it.

During the experiment, for two months, an orphan baby from a shelter was shown a tame white rat, a white rabbit, cotton wool, a Santa Claus mask with a beard, etc. Two months later, the child was put on a rug in the middle of the room and allowed to play with the rat. At first, the child was not at all afraid of the rat and calmly played with it. After a while, Watson began to hit the metal plate behind the child's back with an iron hammer every time Albert touched the rat. After repeating the blows, Albert began to avoid contact with the rat.

A week later, the experiment was repeated - this time the strip was hit five times, simply by placing the rat in the cradle. The baby cried only at the sight of a white rat. After another five days, Watson decided to test whether the child would be afraid of similar objects. The child was afraid of a white rabbit, cotton wool, a Santa Claus mask. Since the scientist did not make loud sounds when showing objects, Watson concluded that the fear reactions were transferred. Watson suggested that many of the fears, antipathies, and anxiety states of adults are formed in early childhood. Unfortunately, Watson never managed to save baby Albert from his unreasonable fear, which was entrenched for the rest of his life.

Acquired helplessness (1966)

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

As a result, the dogs developed the so-called "acquired helplessness" - a reaction to unpleasant stimuli, based on the conviction of helplessness in front of the outside world. The animals soon began showing signs of clinical depression. After a while, the dogs from the third group were released from their cages and placed in open enclosures, from which it was easy to escape. The dogs were again electrocuted, but none of them even thought about running away. Instead, they reacted passively to pain, perceiving it as inevitable.

The dogs learned from previous negative experiences that escape was impossible and no longer made any attempts to escape from the cage. Scientists have suggested that the human response to stress is much like a dog's: people become helpless after several failures, one after the other. It is only unclear whether such a banal conclusion was worth the suffering of the unfortunate animals.

The Milgram Experiment (1974)

The 1974 experiment by Stanley Milgram of Yale University is described by the author in Submission to Authority: An Experimental Study. The experiment involved an experimenter, a subject, and an actor who played the role of another subject. At the beginning of the experiment, the roles of “teacher” and “student” were distributed “by lot” between the subject and the actor. In reality, the subject was always given the role of the "teacher", and the hired actor was always the "student".

Before the start of the experiment, the “teacher” was explained that the purpose of the experiment was supposedly to reveal new methods of memorizing information. In reality, the experimenter set out to investigate the behavior of a person who receives instructions that diverge from his internal behavioral norms from an authoritative source. The "student" was tied to a chair to which a stun gun was attached. Both the "student" and "teacher" received a "demonstration" electric shock of 45 volts.

Then the “teacher” went into another room and had to give the “student” simple memorization tasks over the speakerphone. For each student's mistake, the subject had to press a button, and the student received an electric shock of 45 volts. In reality, the actor playing the student only pretended to receive electric shocks. Then, after each mistake, the teacher had to increase the voltage by 15 volts. At some point, the actor began to demand that the experiment be stopped. The “teacher” began to doubt, and the experimenter replied to this: “The experiment requires that you continue. Please continue. "

As the tension increased, the actor acted out more and more discomfort, then severe pain, and finally broke into a scream. The experiment continued up to 450 volts. If the "teacher" hesitated, the experimenter assured him that he was taking full responsibility for the experiment and for the safety of the "student" and that the experiment should be continued.

The results were shocking: 65% of the "teachers" gave a 450 volt discharge, knowing that the "student" was in great pain. Contrary to all the preliminary forecasts of the experimenters, most of the subjects obeyed the instructions of the scientist who led the experiment and punished the "student" with an electric shock, and in a series of experiments of forty subjects, not one stopped to the level of 300 volts, five refused to obey only after this level, and 26 "teachers" from 40 have reached the end of the scale.

Critics said that the subjects were hypnotized by the authority of Yale University. In response to this criticism, Milgram repeated the experiment, renting a squalid building in Bridgeport, Connecticut, under the banner of the Bridgeport Research Association. The results did not change qualitatively: 48% of the subjects agreed to reach the end of the scale. In 2002, the summary results of all similar experiments showed that 61% to 66% of “teachers” reach the end of the scale, regardless of the time and place of the experiment.

The conclusions from the experiment were the most frightening: the unknown dark side of human nature is inclined not only to mindlessly obey authority and carry out the most inconceivable instructions, but also to justify their own behavior with the received "order". Many participants in the experiment felt a sense of superiority over the "student" and, pressing the button, were sure that the "student" who answered the question incorrectly was getting what he deserved.

Ultimately, the results of the experiment showed that the need for obedience to authorities is so deeply rooted in our minds that the subjects continued to follow directions, despite mental suffering and intense internal conflict.

"The Source of Despair" (1960)

Harry Harlow conducted his cruel experiments on monkeys. In 1960, exploring the issue of social isolation of the individual and methods of protection from it, Harlow took a baby monkey from his mother and placed it in a cage all alone, and he chose those babies who had the strongest connection with the mother. The monkey was kept in a cage for a year, after which it was released.

Most individuals showed various mental abnormalities. The scientist made the following conclusions: even a happy childhood is not a defense against depression. The results, to put it mildly, are not impressive: a similar conclusion could have been made without cruel experiments on animals. However, the movement in defense of animal rights began precisely after the publication of the results of this experiment.