Incredible Facts

Flowers of Darwin

Most people are familiar with the activities of Charles Darwin and his famous journey to South America. He made his most important discoveries in the Galapagos Islands, where each of the 20 islands had its own unique set of species, perfectly adapted to living in those conditions. But few people know about Darwin's experiments after he returned to England. Some of them were focused on orchids.

In the process of growing and studying several types of orchids, he realized that the complex orchid flowers are an adaptation that allows the flowers to attract insects, which then transfer the pollen to neighboring plants. Each insect is specifically designed to pollinate one type of orchid. Take, for example, the Star of Bethlehem orchid (Angraecum sesquipedale), which stores nectar at a depth of 30 centimeters. Darwin predicted that there must be an insect that pollinates this type of orchid. Of course, in 1903, scientists discovered a species called the dusky butterfly, which has a long proboscis that can reach the nectar of this species of orchid.

Darwin used the data he collected about orchids and their insect pollinators to strengthen his theory of natural selection. He argued that cross-pollinated orchids are more viable than self-pollinated ones, since self-pollination reduces genetic diversity, which ultimately has a direct impact on the survival of the species. So, three years later, after he first described natural selection In On the Origin of Species, Darwin did some more experiments on colors and solidified his claims about the limits of evolution.

Deciphering DNA

James Watson and Francis Crick came very close to deciphering DNA, but their discoveries are largely dependent on the work of Alfred Hershey and Martha Chase, who in 1952 carried out the famous this day an experiment that helped them determine how DNA molecules are related to heredity. Hershey and Chase were working with a type of virus known as a bacteriophage. This protein-coated virus surrounds the DNA strand, infects the bacterial cell, which programs it to produce new infected cells. The virus then kills the cell and new viruses are born. Hershey and Chase knew this, but they also didn't know which component—protein or DNA—was responsible for what was happening. They didn't know this until they did their ingenious "blender" experiment, which led them to DNA ribonucleic acids.

Since Hershey and Chase's experiment, many scientists such as Rosalind Franklin have focused on studying DNA and its molecular structure. Franklin used a technique called X-ray diffraction to study DNA. It involves the "invasion" of X-rays into the fibers of purified DNA. When rays interact with a molecule, they "go astray" from their original course and become diffracted. The diffracted beams then form a picture of a unique molecule ready for analysis. Franklin's famous photograph shows the X-shaped curve that Watson and Crick called "the signature of the DNA molecule." They were also able to determine the width of the spiral by looking at Franklin's image.

First vaccination

Until the global eradication of smallpox in the late 20th century, the disease was a serious problem. In the 18th century, the disease caused by the smallpox virus killed one in ten children born in Sweden and France. "Catching" the virus was the only possible "treatment". This led to the fact that people themselves tried to catch the virus from festering ulcers. Unfortunately, many of them died in the dangerous attempt to self-vaccinate.

Edward Jenner, a British physician, began studying the virus and developing effective methods treatment. The genesis of his experiments was the observation that milkmaids living in his hometown, were often infected with the vaccinia virus, a non-fatal disease similar to smallpox. Milkmaids who contracted cowpox seemed to be immune from smallpox infection, so in 1796 Jenner decided to test whether a person could develop immunity to smallpox when infected with the cowpox virus. The boy over whom Jenner decided to conduct his experiment was named James Phipps (James Phipps). Jenner cut Phipps' arm and infected him with cowpox. After a while the boy recovered. 48 days later, a doctor injected him with the smallpox virus and found that the boy was immune.

Scientists now know that vaccinia and variola viruses are so similar that the immune system humans are unable to tell them apart.

Proof of the existence of the atomic nucleus

Physicist Ernest Rutherford has already won Nobel Prize in 1908 for his radioactive work, while at that time he also began to conduct experiments to reveal the structure of the atom. The experiments were based on his previous research, which showed that radioactivity consists of two types of rays - alpha and beta. Rutherford and Hans Geiger established that alpha rays are streams of positively charged particles. When he fired alpha particles onto the screen, they produced a clear and sharp image. But if a thin sheet of mica was placed between the source of alpha radiation and the screen, then the resulting image was blurry. It was clear that the mica was scattering some alpha particles, but how and why this happened was not clear at the time.

In 1911, a physicist placed a thin sheet of gold foil between an alpha source and a screen, 1-2 atoms thick. He also placed another screen in front of the source of alpha radiation in order to understand which of the particles are deflected back. On a screen behind the foil, Rutherford observed a diffuse pattern similar to that which he saw when using a sheet of mica. What he saw on the screen in front of the foil greatly surprised Rutherford, as several alpha particles bounced straight back. Rutherford concluded that the strong positive charge at the heart of the gold atoms sent the alpha particles back to the source. He called this strong positive charge the "nucleus", and stated that compared to the total size of an atom, its nucleus must be very small, otherwise many more particles would come back. Today, scientists like Rutherford visualize atoms: small, positively charged nuclei surrounded by a large, mostly empty space inhabited by a few electrons.

x-ray

We have already discussed Franklin's X-ray diffraction studies above, but he owes much of his work to Dorothy Crowfoot Hodgkin, one of only three women to win the Nobel Prize in Chemistry. In 1945, Hodgkin was considered one of the world's leading practitioners of X-ray diffraction techniques, so it is not surprising that it was she who, after all, showed the structure of one of today's most important chemical substances in medicine - penicillin. Alexander Fleming discovered the bacteria-killing substance as early as 1928, but it took scientists some more time to purify the substance in order to develop an effective treatment. Thus, with the help of atoms of penicillin, Hodgkin managed to create semi-synthetic derivatives of penicillin, which turned out to be a revolution in the fight against infections.

Hodgkin's research became known as X-ray crystallography. Chemists crystallized the compounds they wanted to analyze for the first time. It was a challenge. After testing penicillin crystals by two different companies, Hodgkin sent X-ray waves through the crystals and allowed the radiation to "penetrate the test object." When the X-rays interacted with the electrons of the object under study, the rays became slightly diffracted. This resulted in a sharp pattern of dots on the film. By analyzing the position and brightness of these dots and performing many calculations, Hodgkin determined exactly how the atoms were arranged in the penicillin molecule.

A few years later, she used the same technology to reveal the structure of vitamin B12. She received the Nobel Prize in Chemistry in 1964, an honor that no other woman has received.

The emergence of life

In 1929, biochemists John Haldane and Alexander Oparin independently proposed that there was no free oxygen in the Earth's early atmosphere. In those harsh conditions, they assumed organic compounds could be formed from simple molecules, receiving a serious boost of energy, whether it be ultraviolet radiation or bright light. Haldane also added that the oceans were probably the first sources of these organic compounds.

American chemists Harold Urey and Stanley Miller decided to test the hypotheses of Oparin and Haldane in 1953. They were able to recreate the Earth's early atmosphere by carefully working on a controlled, closed system. The role of the ocean was played by a flask with heated water. After the water vapor rose and collected in another container, Yurii and Miller added hydrogen, methane, and ammonia to simulate an oxygen-free atmosphere. Then sparks were formed in the flask, representing light in a mixture of gases. Finally, the condenser cooled the gases in a liquid, which they then took for analysis.

A week later, Yurii and Miller got amazing results: organic compounds were present in abundance in the chilled liquid. In particular, Miller discovered several amino acids, including glycine, alanine, and glutamic acid. Amino acids are the building blocks of proteins, which are themselves key components of both cellular structures and cellular enzymes responsible for the functioning of important chemical reactions. Urey and Miller concluded that organic molecules could well survive in an oxygen-free environment, which, in turn, did not make us wait for the appearance of the simplest organisms.

Creation of light

When light appeared in the 19th century, it remained a mystery that inspired many fascinating experiments. For example, Thomas Young's "double slit experiment" showed how light waves but not particles. But they didn't know then how fast light travels.

In 1878, physicist A.A. Michelson conducted an experiment to calculate the speed of light and prove that it was a finite, measurable quantity. Here's what he did:

1. First, he placed two mirrors far apart on opposite sides of the dam near the university campus, arranging them so that the incident light reflected from one mirror and returned back. He measured the distance between the mirrors and found that it was 605.4029 meters.

3. With the help of lenses, he focused a beam of light on a fixed mirror. When a beam of light touched a fixed mirror, it bounced off and was reflected in a rotating mirror, near which Michelson placed a special screen. Due to the fact that the second mirror rotated, the trajectory of the return of the light beam changed slightly. When Michelson measured these deviations, he came up with a figure of 133 mm.

4. Using the data obtained, he was able to measure the speed of light, equal to 186,380 miles per second (299,949,530 kilometers). The allowable value for the speed of light today is 299,792,458 km per second. Michelson's measurements showed a surprisingly accurate result. Moreover, scientists now have at their disposal more accurate ideas about light and the foundations on which the theory of quantum mechanics and the theory of relativity are built.

Discovery of radiation

1897 was a very important year for Marie Curie. Her first child was born, and just a few weeks after his birth, she went to look for a topic for her doctoral dissertation. Eventually, she decided to study the "uranium rays" first described by Henri Becquerel. Becquerel discovered these rays by accident when he left uranium salts wrapped in an opaque material along with photographic plates in a dark room, and returned to find that the photographic plates were completely illuminated. Marie Curie chose to study these mysterious rays in order to identify other elements that act in a similar way.

Already on early stage Studying Curie realized that thorium produces the same rays as uranium. She began labeling these unique elements as "radioactive" and quickly realized that the strength of the radiation produced by uranium and thorium depended on the amount of thorium and uranium. In the end, she will be able to prove that the rays are the properties of the atoms of a radioactive element. In itself, this was a revolutionary discovery, but Curie stopped it.

She discovered that pitchblende (uraninite) is more radioactive than uranium, which led her to the idea that there must be an element unknown to her in natural minerals. Her husband Pierre joined the research, and they systematically reduced pitchblende until a new isolated element was discovered. They named it polonium, after Mary's homeland of Poland. Shortly thereafter, they discovered another radioactive element, which they called radium, from the Latin for "ray." Curie has won two Nobel Prizes for her work.

dog days

Did you know that Ivan Pavlov, a Russian physiologist and chemist, and the author of an experiment to salivate and condition dogs in dogs, was not at all interested in psychology or behavior? He was interested in the topics of digestion and circulation. In fact, he was studying the digestive system of dogs when he discovered what we know today as "conditioned reflexes."

In particular, he tried to understand the relationship between salivation and the work of the stomach. Shortly before this, Pavlov had already noted that the stomach does not begin to digest food without salivation, which occurs first. In other words, reflexes in the autonomic nervous system closely related to each other these two processes. Next, Pavlov decided to find out if external stimuli could affect digestion in a similar way. To test this, he started turning the lights on and off while the dog was eating, ticking the metronome, and making the buzzer sound audible. In the absence of these stimuli, dogs only salivated when they saw and ate food. But after some time, they began to salivate when stimulated by sound and light, even if they were not given food at that time. Pavlov also found that this type of conditioned reflex dies if the stimulus is "misused" too often. For example, if a dog hears a sound signal often, but does not receive food, then after a while, it stops responding to the sound by salivation.

Pavlov published his results in 1903. A year later, he received the Nobel Prize in Medicine, not for his work on conditioned reflexes, but "in recognition of his work on the physiology of digestion, through which knowledge of vital aspects has been transformed and expanded."

Stanley Milgram's experiments, which he conducted in the 1960s, still qualify as one of the most famous and controversial scientific experiments to this day. Milgram wanted to find out how far an ordinary person could go in inflicting pain on another person under the pressure of authority. Here's what he did:

1. Milgram recruited volunteers, ordinary people who were ordered to inflict some pain on other volunteer actors. The experimenter played the role of an authority figure who was constantly present in the room during the study.

2. Before the start of each test, the authority demonstrated to unsuspecting volunteers how to use a shock - an apparatus that could hit a person with a discharge of 15-450 volts ( elevated level danger).

3. The scientist went on to say that they should test how the shock can improve the memory of words through associations. He instructed the volunteers during the experiment to "reward" the volunteer actors with shock blows for incorrect answers. The more wrong answers, the higher the voltage level on the device. Moreover, it is worth noting that the device was made on highest level: over each switch was written the corresponding voltage, from "weak shock" to "hard to bear shock", the device was equipped with many panels with pointer voltmeters. That is, the subjects did not have the opportunity to doubt the authenticity of the experiment, and the study was structured in such a way that for each correct answer there were three erroneous ones and the authority told the volunteer with what "blow" to punish the "incapable student."

4. "Students" screamed when they received shock blows. After the force of the blow exceeded 150 volts, they demanded release. At the same time, the authority urged the volunteers to continue the experiment, not paying attention to the demands of the "students".

5. Some of the participants in the experiment were willing to leave after reaching the 150 volt punishment, but most continued until they reached the maximum shock level of 450 volts.

At the end of the experiments, many spoke out about the unethical nature of this study, but the results were impressive. Milgram proved that ordinary people can hurt an innocent person simply because they received such a command from a powerful authority.

• 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 protecting 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. the federal law"On Medicines" 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 Oh.

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 An honest description of the follow-up and its goals, including a clear explanation of which actual procedures are experimental. A description of the associated inconvenience and the anticipated - within reasonable - risk. Description of those useful results, which - 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 accepted by a wide range of patients without alternative, the patient regards the rejection of offers to the doctor as a rejection of 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, a 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 their child if the treatment is for the good and benefit of the latter. 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 consent of the child - with the consent of the parents or guardians - complies with international law.

"Blue blood" - Perftoran. Blood transfusion. The invention of blood substitutes. Perftoran is a blood substitute with a gas transport function, which 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 emulsion for infusion.

The Solaris Experiment In the novel famous writer- science fiction writer S. Lem "Solaris" the main character, astronaut-psychologist Criss 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.

Why do people behave the way they do. Psychologists have pondered this question since ancient times. Much of the current knowledge about human mind based on experiments conducted by psychologists in the last century.

1. Violinist in the metro station

How many people take a moment to stop and appreciate the beauty around them. According to an experiment conducted in 2007, most likely almost no one does this. World-famous violinist Josh Bell spent a day as a street musician in a Washington DC subway station to see how many people would stop and listen to him play.

Although he played a $3.5 million handmade violin and his $100 concert in Boston had just sold out, very few people stopped by to appreciate his fine playing. In the end, Bell made a measly $32 for the entire day.

2. Little Albert

Experiment " Little Albert"is similar to the experiment with Pavlov's dog, but it was carried out with people. This is probably one of the most unethical psychological studies of all time. In an experiment conducted in 1920, John B. Watson and his partner Rosalie Rayner at Johns Hopkins University tried to develop irrational fears in a nine-month-old boy. Watson first placed a white rat in front of the baby, who at first showed no fear.

He then began to hit the steel rod with a hammer, scaring the boy named Albert every time he touched the rat. After a while, the boy began to cry and show signs of fear every time the rat appeared in the room. Watson also developed similar conditioned reflexes with other animals and objects until Albert became afraid of them all.

3. Milgram experiment

An experiment conducted in 1961 by Yale University psychologist Stanley Milgram measured people's willingness to obey authority figures who ordered them to perform actions that were contrary to the moral concepts of the subjects. Participants were told to act out the role of the "teacher" and shock the "student" who was supposedly in the other room every time he answered a question incorrectly.

In fact, no one was shocked, and the "teacher" who pressed the button, Milgram played a sound recording of screams, creating the appearance that the "student" was in severe pain and wanted to finish the experiment. Despite these protests, many of the participants continued the experiment because they were ordered to do so, constantly "increasing the tension" (so they thought) after each wrong answer. Experiments like this show that people are willing to go against their conscience if they are ordered to do so by their “boss.”

4. Marshmallow experiment

Could delayed gratification be an indicator of future success? This is what Walter Mischel of Stanford University was trying to determine in 1972. During the so-called "Marshmallow Experiment", children between the ages of four and six were left in a room where marshmallows were placed on the table in front of them. After that, the experimenter left the room for 15 minutes and said that the child would receive a second marshmallow if the first one was still on the table by the time he returned.

The examiner recorded how long each child resisted the temptation to eat marshmallows and then noted whether this correlated with the child's academic success. A minority of the 600 children ate the marshmallow right away, most couldn't take 15 minutes, and only one-third managed to delay the pleasure long enough to get a second marshmallow.

In subsequent studies, Michel found that those who were able to delay gratification scored higher in school than their peers, meaning that the trait is likely to stay with a person for life.

5. Bystander effect

In case of occurrence emergency(traffic accidents, crime, etc.), most people would probably like to be in a busy area, because there they would have a better chance of getting help. Contrary to popular belief, if there are a lot of people around, then this does not guarantee anything.

A psychological phenomenon called the “bystander effect” manifests itself in the fact that people are more likely to help someone in need if there are no (or very few) other witnesses around. If there are a lot of people around, then everyone will stand and stare, believing that someone else should help.

6. Asch experiment

Asch's experiment is another well-known example of the temptation to fit in when there are many people around. During this series of experiments, conducted in the 1950s, the subject was placed in a room with other participants, who were all decoys. They were shown two cards in turn, one of which showed one line, and the other three, and only one of them was the same length as on the first card.

The subjects were asked to name which of these three lines was the same length as the line on the first card. "Decoy ducks" all unanimously gave the same wrong answer. As a result, the subject also began to repeat after them, although this answer was obviously wrong. The results once again showed that people tend to try to be "like everyone else" in the crowd.

7 The Stanford Prison Experiment

The Stanford Prison Experiment is considered one of the most unethical psychological experiments of all time. It studied the psychological effects that prison conditions can have on human behavior. In 1971, an experimental model prison was built in the basement of the Stanford University psychology department building.

Twenty-four male students were randomly selected to play the role of either prisoner or warden for two weeks. The students eventually became so adapted to their role that they began to become aggressive.

8. Bobo doll experiment

During the 1960s, there was much debate about how genetics, factors environment and social learning influence the development of children. In 1961, Albert Bandura experimented with the Bobo doll to prove that human behavior stems from social imitation rather than from hereditary genetic factors.

He created three groups of children: one was shown by adults aggressive behavior in relation to the Bobo doll, another showed an adult playing with a Bobo doll, and the third group was the control group. The results showed that the children who were exposed to the aggressive model were themselves more likely to exhibit aggressive behavior towards the doll, while the other groups did not display aggressive behavior.

9. Pavlov's dog

The name of Academician Pavlov today is inextricably associated with dogs and a bell. This famous experiment made the concept of a conditioned reflex widespread. Pavlov studied the rate of salivation in dogs when eating.

He noticed that the dog began to salivate even at the sight of food, so he began to ring the bell every time he gave food to the dog. Over time, dogs began to associate the ringing of the bell with food and began to salivate at the sound of the bell.

10. Ladder-piano

Volkswagen's Pleasure Theory experiment proves that people's behavior can be changed in better side if you make routine activities more fun. In a recent experiment, the company made musical steps shaped like piano keys on the stairs of a metro station in Stockholm to see if more people would choose the healthier option of walking up the stairs from the metro rather than the escalator. On the same day, 66 percent more people climbed the stairs than usual.

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 at an 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, white rabbit, 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 social norms people who have lost their freedom. To do this, he selected a group of student volunteers, consisting of 24 participants, then locked them in the basement of the 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, inventing 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 asked what made them suffer to a stranger unaware that he was not really in pain, the students were at a loss for an 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.

Voluntary participants in the experiment were mostly students, whose faces were painted with black lines, allowing you to better see the movement of the 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 before 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 characteristic of all people, however, it demonstrated dark side 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 a 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 of different ages also became participants in fascinating psychological research. 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 the last to be asked about the color of the toy. 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 a particular business. 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 a large number of various 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 conducted from 1924 to 1932 in American city 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 factory management was interested in raising productivity, scientists were given complete freedom of action. 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 affected 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 they receive special attention from scientists and managers already affects 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 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 the imposed social role. Funding was provided by the US Navy in order to explain the causes of conflicts in marines and correctional institutions of the Navy. 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.

AT 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 decrease 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 own forces, then we make every effort 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 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 person.
• “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 name of the porridge will be called by a child who has tasted a salty “site” when the other three say that it is sweet, thereby testing the importance of public opinion.
• "Portraits": participants are shown 5 portraits and asked to find out if there are two photos of the same person among them. At the same time, all participants, except for one who came later, must say that two different photos are 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 about 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 life 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.

More detailed information about the "monstrous" experiment is.

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. The inner world of 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 would never do under normal conditions.

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

It's called learned helplessness. mental condition, 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 had developed "learned helplessness" and became confident that they were helpless in the face of the outside world. The scientists then concluded that human psyche behaves like this 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 stamina 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 is growing up as a full-fledged girl, parents and school teachers It was argued that, on the contrary, the child exhibits all the properties of the 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 daily life? Probably, only that a person is born with a certain set of qualities and predispositions, determined by 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 precisely 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 lives. 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.