By Arohi Sachar
Unlike popular opinion, experiments like The Stanford Prison and Little Albert are not the most unethical experiments in Psychology. Psychology has a dark history and although most of it is not talked about, there are people who in the name of ‘science’ have performed various observations that exceed all levels of cruelty. Like most experiments in this subject, this cruelty isn’t completely physical but more mentally and emotionally tormenting. So grave that it can change a person forever or in this case, a harmless animal.
Harry Harlow was an American psychologist best known for his maternal-separation, dependency needs, and social isolation experiments on rhesus monkeys. Previous to this “Pit of Despair” experiment, Harry Harlow suffered the death of his wife. His colleagues noticed a change in his demeanour and noted that his experimentation focused on isolation and depression.
The aim of this experiment was to produce an animal model of clinical depression and understand the side effects of being forced to stay away from the family. Read that again. Why would anyone need to hold a “scientific study” to understand the obvious effects of isolation? Attachment theories were vague at the time but Harlow was hell-bent on proving his point that attachment depends more on emotional care than food. He just did not stop. Every experiment did more damage than help.
The degree of it being unethical is beyond comprehensibility because he was actually hoping to push these monkeys into some sort of highly depressive state, which worked way better than he expected it to.
He took babies and isolated them from birth. They had no contact with each other or anybody else.
He kept some this way for three months, some for six, some for nine and some for the first year of their lives. He then put them back with other monkeys to see what effect their failure to form attachment had on behaviour.
The monkeys engaged in bizarre behaviour such as clutching their own bodies and rocking compulsively. Two monkeys starved themselves to death.
They were then placed back in the company of other monkeys. To start with the babies were scared of the other monkeys, and then became very aggressive towards them. They were also unable to communicate or socialize with other monkeys. The other monkeys bullied them. They indulged in self-mutilation, tearing hair out, scratching, and biting their own arms and legs.
Harlow wrote- “No monkey has died during isolation yet. When initially removed from total social isolation, however, they usually go into a state of depression, characterized by ... autistic self-clutching and rocking. One of six monkeys isolated for 3 months refused to eat after release and died 5 days later. The autopsy report attributed death to emotional anorexia. ... The effects of 6 months of total social isolation were so devastating and debilitating that we had to get the experiment rolling, we assumed initially that 12 months of isolation would not produce any additional decrement. This assumption proved to be false.”
Harlow concluded that privation (never forming an attachment bond) is permanently damaging (to monkeys). The extent of the abnormal behaviour reflected the length of the isolation. This is where he’s crossed the line.
“Not forming a bond is permanently damaging.” That is what came out of this experiment.
One of Harlow's students, William Mason, explains it perfectly. He said that Harlow 'kept this going to the point where it was clear to many people that the work was really violating ordinary sensibilities, that anybody with respect for life or people would find this offensive'.
You might think the worst part is over but it’s not. Harlow actually won a national medal of science-base on this work with monkeys, in addition to being named the president of the American Psychological Association (APA).
Harlow's research is still discussed in psychology, anthropology and animal behaviour classes. Yet this kind of profound primate suffering is not consigned to the historical record. Today rhesus monkey infants are still forcibly separated by laboratory researchers from their mothers and stressed in ways that leave them physically and emotionally traumatized.
Harry Harlow violated the ethical and moral standards of Psychology yet is still celebrated. He drove animals to insanity but all his actions are ‘justified.’ We need to stop marginalizing the consequences of experiments like this. Why does their so-called ‘contribution’ have no mention of harm and suffering done to monkeys? If they were human infants, the experiments wouldn’t have even been done in the first place but just because they’re animals we let it slide? Look at Harlow’s work from the other perspective. Not how he ‘provided significant research for attachment theories’ but how he deprived an animal of motherly love. How he was ready to go to any extreme to make the rhesus feel pain and isolation.
Basic betrayal of the notions of decency should be condemned.
Comments