This document discusses common problems in research such as self-fulfilling prophecy and ways to avoid it like single-blind and double-blind experiments. It provides an example of the Milgram experiment which found that 62% of participants administered painful shocks when instructed by an authority figure. It also describes the placebo effect experiment which found that 53-80% of participants reported benefits from placebo drugs.

1. Problems and
Solutions
in Research

2. Self-Fulfilling
Prophecy
A situation in which a researcher’s
expectations influence that person’s
own behavior
Those behaviors can then influence
the participant’s behavior

3. Two ways to avoid self-
fulfilling prophecy
Single Blind - an experiment in which
the participants are unaware of which
participants have received the
treatment
Double Blind - an experiment in which
neither the participants nor the
experimenter know which participants
receive which treatment

4. Milgram Experiment
Hypothesis - Would participants
administer painful shocks because an
authority figure had instructed them
to do so
Independent variable - instructed to
deliver shocks from authority figure
Dependent variable - administer
shocks and increasing the level

5. Design of the experiment

8. Participants - 200 college students
and adults (told participants are
studying affects or punishment on
learning)
Results - 62% pushed the button to
the severe level. Ordinary
individuals could easily inflict pain
on others when instructed by an
authority figure

9. Type of experiment - single blind
criticism - deception in research and
ethical principle
Swarthmore college - young, liberal
minded, highly educated students
would not conform as the WWII
generation
88%

10. Placebo Effect
Hypothesis - If people are given and
told about a certain drug then they
will believe in it’s affects
Independent variable - Type of drug
Dependent variable - response to
placebo

11. Participants
experimental group -
“new tranquilizer”
“new energizer”
Control group - no drugs

12. Results - 53% - 80% reported that
they had benefitted from the drug
Type of experiment - double blind