Final answer:
Criticism of fairness experiments relates to ethical considerations such as potential harm and validity. Experimenters respond by emphasizing robust experimental design, ethical guidelines adherence, informed consent, and participant welfare. Breaching experiments, like those that test social norms, require particular care to avoid intruding on privacy or causing undue distress.
Step-by-step explanation:
Criticism of experiments on fairness often concern ethical considerations and the validity of the results. For instance, in Frances Heussenstamm's 1971 experiment on police prejudice, the clear independent variables were the students' background, driving records, and commuting routes. The critique could be on the selection process, clarity of the variables or the impact of the experiment on the participants.
In response to such criticism, experimenters emphasize the importance of a rigorous experimental design that includes random assignment to treatment groups, control groups, and, possibly, the use of placebos and blinding of participants and researchers to preserve the integrity of the study and to attribute differences in outcomes to the explanatory variable.
Ethical considerations must also address the potential harm to participants, as seen in the Stanford prison experiment. Here, the treatment of 'prisoners' highlighted the risks of psychological harm, leading to early termination of the study. Experimenters respond by adhering to ethical guidelines that ensure the welfare of participants, respect for individual autonomy, and fair treatment throughout the experiment.
Breaching experiments, which involve interacting with unsuspecting individuals in public to study social norms, also receive criticism for causing discomfort and disregarding privacy. The scientific community typically expects researchers to minimize harm, acquire informed consent, and debrief participants about the nature of the experiment, especially when the study could impact them emotionally or socially.