Milgram

• Stanley Milgram conducted an experiment focusing on the conflict between obedience to authority and personal conscience
• Milgram wanted to investigate whether Germans were particularly obedient to authority figures, as this was a common explanation for the Nazi killings in World War II
• Participants were recruited for a controlled experiment investigating "learning" (re: ethics: deception)
• The "learner" (Mr. Wallace) was a confederate who was strapped to a chair with electrodes
• The "teacher" was instructed to administer electric shocks to the learner for each wrong answer, increasing the shock level each time
• The teacher was given prods to continue administering shocks if they hesitated
• 65% of participants continued to the highest level of 450 volts, and all participants continued to 300 volts
• Ethical concerns in Milgram's obedience research:

  • Baumrind criticized the lack of informed consent
  • Participants believed they were shocking a real person
  • Participants exposed to extremely stressful situations
  • Milgram debriefed participants after the experiment
  • Participants were assured that their behavior was common
  • Milgram misrepresented debriefing details in some cases
• Right to withdrawal in Milgram's study:

  • Participants were discouraged from withdrawing through verbal prods
  • Milgram argued that orders were necessary for the study on obedience
  • 35% of participants chose to withdraw despite the prods
• Milgram’s procedure consistently elicits high levels of compliance across studies, samples, and eras, highlighting the power of situational pressures to yield obedience
• Milgram's study on obedience was inspired by the atrocities of Nazi Germany, particularly the concentration camps
• Milgram's study aimed to investigate how obedient individuals would be to orders from a person in authority, even if it resulted in harm to others
• Milgram's study used a controlled observation design, where subjects' behavior was observed and recorded in a laboratory setting
• The independent variable (IV) in Milgram's study can be considered as authority, while the dependent variable (DV) was the level of obedience measured by the maximum shock administered
• Obedience was operationally defined as the maximum shock or voltage administered before refusing to continue
• There were two types of subjects in the experiment: defiant subjects who refused to shock at a certain point and obedient subjects who shocked all the way to the maximum voltage of 450 volts
• Milgram's study was conducted at Yale University in America
• Milgram's study was not considered an experimental study due to the lack of multiple levels in the IV, random allocation, and control group
• The sample for Milgram's study consisted of 40 male participants aged between 20 to 50, recruited through volunteer sampling using newspaper advertisements
• Participants were paid $4.50 for their participation in the study, which was a significant amount at the time
• Two roles: teacher and learner, hat with two slips of paper both saying "teacher" for deception
• Shock generator made with great detail for authenticity, no actual electric shocks given
• Subject receives a sample shock of 45 volts before the experiment starts for authenticity
• Instructions for wrong answers: shock the learner, move one level higher on the shock generator after each wrong answer
• In the actual study, subjects were instructed to start from 15 volts and increase the shock level by one step each time the learner gave a wrong answer
• The learner, who is a stooge, would give scripted responses with approximately three wrong answers for every correct one
• At 300 volts, the learner banged the wall, and at 315 volts, they repeated the wall banging
• After 315 volts, the learner no longer responded or banged on the wall
• Experimental feedback included standardized prods given to subjects if they showed unwillingness to continue shocking the learner
• Prods included firm instructions to continue shocking, emphasizing the importance of the experiment
• If subjects still refused after the prods, the experiment was called off
• Special prods were given if subjects questioned the possibility of permanent physical injury to the learner
• Debriefing after the study included a reconciliation session between the subject and the victim (learner)
• Efforts were made to reduce any tensions that arose from the experiment during debriefing
• Debriefing is important to ensure subjects leave in a state of well-being similar to how they arrived
• Debriefing is essential for ethical reasons to ensure participants are not negatively impacted by the study
• Predictions were made by 14 Yale seniors and Milgram's colleagues about the obedience levels of participants
• Most predictions suggested that only a minority of people would go all the way to the maximum 450 volts
• Participants were convinced of the reality of administering shocks and believed the most potent shocks were extremely painful
• Participants showed signs of extreme tension, nervous laughter, and some even had uncontrollable seizures