Published online Dec Helped in the design of the experiment: Provided system support, critical comments, and prepared multi-media materials for the paper:
Three individuals took part in each session of the experiment: The "experimenter", who was in charge of the session. The "teacher", a volunteer for a single session. The "teacher" was led to believe that they were merely assisting, whereas they were actually the subject of the experiment.
The "learner", an actor and a confederate of the experimenter, who pretended to be a volunteer. The subject and the actor arrived at the session together. The experimenter told them that they were taking part in "a scientific study of memory and learning", to see what the effect of punishment is on a subject's ability to memorize content.
Also, he always clarified that the payment for their participation in the experiment was secured regardless of its development. The subject and actor drew slips of paper to determine their roles.
Unknown to the subject, both slips said "teacher". The actor would always claim to have drawn the slip that read "learner", thus guaranteeing that the subject would always be the "teacher". Next, the teacher and learner were taken into an adjacent room where the learner was strapped into what appeared to be an electric chair.
The experimenter told the participants this was to ensure that the learner would not escape. The teacher and learner were then separated, so that they could communicate but not see each other.
The teacher was then given a list of word pairs that he was to teach the learner. The teacher began by reading the list of word pairs to the learner.
The teacher would then read the first word of each pair and read four possible answers. The learner would press a button to indicate his response. If the answer was incorrect, the teacher would administer a shock to the learner, with the voltage increasing in volt increments for each wrong answer.
If correct, the teacher would read the next word pair. In reality, there were no shocks.
After the learner was separated from the teacher, the learner set up a tape recorder integrated with the electroshock generator, which played prerecorded sounds for each shock level.
As the voltage of the fake shocks increased, the learner began making audible protests, such as banging repeatedly on the wall that separated him from the teacher. When the highest voltages were reached, the learner fell silent.
The prods were, in this order: The experiment requires that you continue. It is absolutely essential that you continue. You have no other choice, you must go on. If the subject still wished to stop after all four successive verbal prods, the experiment was halted. Otherwise, it was halted after the subject had given the maximum volt shock three times in succession.
If the teacher asked whether the learner might suffer permanent physical harm, the experimenter replied, "Although the shocks may be painful, there is no permanent tissue damage, so please go on.
All of the poll respondents believed that only a very small fraction of teachers the range was from zero to 3 out ofwith an average of 1.
Milgram also informally polled his colleagues and found that they, too, believed very few subjects would progress beyond a very strong shock. They predicted that by the volt shock, when the victim refuses to answer, only 3. Subjects were uncomfortable doing so, and displayed varying degrees of tension and stress.
These signs included sweating, trembling, stuttering, biting their lips, groaning, digging their fingernails into their skin, and some were even having nervous laughing fits or seizures.
Most continued after being assured by the experimenter. Some said they would refund the money they were paid for participating.
Milgram () Study of Obedience Aim: To see whether people would obey and inflict harm on each another person using electric shocks, by following the orders of an authority figure. This was to see whether all individuals had the potential to cause harm like the Germans and the Nazi’s or if they were different. A Critique of Stanley Milgram’s “Behavioral Study of Obedience” Stanley MIlgram is a Yale University social psychologist who wrote “Behavioral Study of Obedience”, an article which granted him many awards and is now considered a landmark. Obedience is compliance with commands given by an authority figure. In the s, the social psychologist Stanley Milgram did a famous research study called the obedience study. It showed that people have a strong tendency to comply with authority figures. Milgram told his forty male volunteer.
Milgram summarized the experiment in his article, "The Perils of Obedience", writing: The legal and philosophic aspects of obedience are of enormous importance, but they say very little about how most people behave in concrete situations.Given the many older criticisms of Milgram’s obedience study and the more damning recent criticisms based on analyses of materials available in the Milgram archives at Yale, this study has become a contentious classic.
Yet, current social psychology textbooks present it as an uncontentious classic, with no coverage of the recent criticisms and . A Critical Evaluation of Stanley Milgram's contribution to Obedience Theory.
(Milgram, ). This essay seeks to critically analyse the impact of Milgram's contribution to the scientific. Related Documents: Conformity And Obedience Essay Obedience Essay Society’s Tendency to Pass on Responsibility The Obedience to Authority Experiment of Stanley Milgram is one of the most studied experiments in American history due to its wide-ranging social implications.
The Milgram Experiment The Milgram Study is a study of social obedience and human interaction with authority figures and conformity. The study began in July of , and was conducted by Yale University psychologist Stanley Milgram.
Milgram () Study of Obedience Aim: To see whether people would obey and inflict harm on each another person using electric shocks, by following the orders of an authority figure.
This was to see whether all individuals had the potential to cause harm like the Germans and the Nazi’s or if they were different.
This articles describes a procedure for the study of destructive obedience in the laboratory. It consists of ordering a naive S to administer increasingly more severe punishment to a victim in the context of a learning experiment.
Punishment is administered by means of a shock generator with 30 graded switches ranging from .