Free will could be defined as an individual’s ability to decide for themselves and to not be controlled by another individual. According to the British Psychological Association (BPS) it is unethical to take away an individual’s feeling of free will. For example an individual participating in an experiment should feel at any time they can leave the experiment without any consequence brought towards them. Is it really unethical to take away free will? I think that forcing an individual physically to stay in experiment e.g. Stanford Prison Experiment is unethical as it can possibly cause harm to an individual. But I think that if a participant is given prompts to stay, as long as this is taken into account in the research results as factor that could have some effect, that this could show more research into how free will can change people’s behaviour.
Research conducted by Davide Rigoni (2011) under the BPS found that undermining the belief that an individual has free will can change how their brain prepares its self for voluntary movement. The experiment was replicated from a previous one by Benjamin Libet`s classic task in the 1980s. The participants were randomly given passage to read which either debunked the sense of free will or a passage that didn’t contain any mention of free will. Participants were then required to watch a clock face and then make a voluntary movement by pressing a button when they have chosen a time of their own choice. While the participant was doing this their brains electrical activity was recorded from electrodes positioned on their scalp. The results showed that the brain already prepares to move the hand before a decision has been made. Free will therefore didn’t apply to the participant’s decision.
According Rigoni`s study (2011) free will is a illusion. Another part of the results showed that brain activity was slower in preparing for motor movement in participants who had read the debunking passage on free will. This affect was more prominent in participants who had less belief in free will than other participants. The study concluded that the beliefs an individual has in free will can change how their brain processes movement and other motions. This creates the topic of whether or not actually free will exists and do we really have control over all our actions. I believe that we do have some free will but that most of our actions are natural which we don`t think about or reflexes that we don`t have control over.
Reference:
http://www.bps.org.uk/news/debunking-free-will-affects-brain
psue85 
Comments on: "Free Will." (7)
It is doubtless that many of our actions are not by free will and are simply reflexes as pointed out. There is strong evidence however that the most life changing decisions in our lives we have free will over. Nicholas (2004) points out that from early childhood, children deploy agent causation. Although it is unclear how it is acquired, the existence of freedom to choose is apparent and appears to be innate (Watson 1975). Although we have our carnal desires, lusts and innate passions, and no matter how much pressure we get from others for those significant decisions like over choosing a spouse, where to live, what course to do in university etc. in the end is up to each of us individually, reminding one of the age old saying that “You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it drink”.
I think that we do have free will in our lives because if you take the idea of addiction. McGue (1991) found that children of parents who have addictions have a 50 to 60% chance of becoming addicted. However not everyone does some people choose not to take drugs or drink alcohol. However if life was deterministic shouldn’t it mean that people with addicted parents should become addicts themselves. I do believe that we do some things just automatically and don’t think about them but I do not believe we are all puppets on strings with no choice in what we want to do.
i do not feel that any individual has complete free will over all of their actions. Although they make their own decisions in life such as what to have for dinner etc, there is always something in the back of everyone’s mind in which could have the potential to stop their decision on the premise of what people know is right and wrong. No one can say they everyone has complete free will as people in which chose to kill or harm another person will be rightly punished, which is obviously right, however that is taking away that one persons free will.
I do not feel that the study Rigoni (2011) completely understands free will. What he found would in my opinion be see as peoples decision making rather than free will. Simply by looking at a clock face can not completely show whether a persons decision is made due to the fact they feel they have free will or not. I believe that they would have chosen either a time they like or a random time.
I also completely disagree with the fact that you have said that little harm could come from prompting people to carry on an experiment. In addition to this being completely unethical, it is also morally wrong. Milgram (1961) prompted his participants to stay in the study and this caused great harm to them mentally. In his follow up he also found that many people didn’t want their results to be used as they were too mentally scarred. Although the BPS guidelines was not introduced whilst this experiment was conducted, now-a-days this would definitely not be accepted, and if it was then where would the line be as too how far we go in order to further our scientific knowledge?
Wow, is it just me that find the idea of us not having true free-will a bit worrying? I mean, I take quite a bit of happiness in believing that I have free-will and that I have full control over my actions in life, the idea that this is challenged on a level I may not be aware of, even if only a few times I find a bit of dis-heartening.
However at least the feeling of free-will is important, Milgram’s study is still looked down upon today for the participants lack of free-will when it came to dropping out and the harm that came to them as a result. Freedom is argued to be a general human right and this should be carried over into psychological research.
I don’t think that the study which measured a certain brain activity before the decision is consciously made actually supports the thesis that there is no free, will, because all it’s saying is that the brain prepares for a particular action, which doesn’t mean that the individual indeed has to execute it. I think it could rather be that the brain is stimulated like if you think of ice cream and you can already taste it without actually eating it. So if you decide to act, your brain will be prepared, but if not, you might still be able to decide not to.
Also like you pointed out how the believe in free will actually changes the way brain works and I think this is a very important aspect of the topic. In the end it has implications like if a criminal actually can be judged for what he has done or not, considering that he might not had another choice. But then again, this implication would probably lead to more crimes happening as people don’t need to fear consequences any more and everyone would have an excuse to act irresponsible and unethical.
When I read this it made me think about our free will in terms of a right to withdraw from experiments. When someone has a monetary incentive to complete an experiment this removes the right to withdraw although it is still there. The pressure applied on someone to continue with an experiment is huge and removes both free will and right to withdraw.
The study conducted by Rigoni et al. (2011) registered significant results for their hypothesis, which was, that the belief that there is no free will affects motor preparation, not that there is no free will. The results are understandable, as any mentally stable human being would feel a bit helpless and alarmed, when presented with evidence that there in no free will.
Wegner and Wheatley (1999) claim that free will is a pattern of: thought, an action that takes place after the thought and is consistent with the though, and the exclusion of any other possible causes for the action. They argue that this pattern can be manipulated, as they did in their study by giving the participants subtle cues to induce certain thoughts and having a “confederate” take the action that was consistent with said thought, showing that free will is only an illusion. I am not too sure of how high the external validity of this experiment actually is, as it is doubtful that there is something or someone that manipulates our daily activities. Some of that free will may be lost when applied on a larger scale, but that is how a society functions, by following certain rules, compromising in certain situations. We are still aware, in most cases, of the circumstances that lead as to make particular choices and decisions.
If there is no free will, why are we held accountable for our actions and their consequences?
Rigoni D., Kühn S., Sartori G.,Brass M., (2011). Inducing disbelief in free will alters brain correlates of preconscious motor preparation: The brain minds whether we believe in free will or not. Psychological Science 22:613–18.
Wegner , D. M. Wheatley , T. P. (1999). Apparent mental causation: Sources of the experience of will. American Psychologist, 54, 480-492.