How does the Holocaust add to the background of the study?
- struggled to comprehend the what led to the persecution by the Nazis
- Eichmann ‘didn’t appear to be a monster but simply someone who did his job’
How does Asch’s work link to this study?
-Milgram was interested in the ethics of the Asch paradigm and making it more humanly significant rather than it being about lines
Who were the participants?
- placed advert in local newspaper for study on memory
- 40 male participants
- range of normal, well-adjusted people from New Haven area of Yale
What was the method of the experiment?
- learner has to learn series of word pairs
- teacher presents him with target word and learner has to select the correct match from list of 4 by pulling lever
- wrong answer leads to electric shock being administered by teacher (0 to 450v with it increasing 15v each time)
What were the verbal prods used?
- please continue
- experiment requires that you continue
- it is absolutely essential that you continue
- you have no other choice, you must go on
- although the shocks may be painful there’s no permanent tissue damage so please go on (additional prod)
- whether the learner likes it or not you must go on until he has learned all the word pairs correctly so please go on (additional prod)
What were the pre-determined recorded objections that the ‘learner’ would say?
- 90v: ugh!
- 120v: ugh! hey this really hurts
- 150v: ugh! experimenter! that’s all. get me out of here. I told you I had heart trouble. my heart’s starting to bother me. I refuse to go on. let me out.
- 345v: no response
What were the results?
- 13% stopped at 150v
- 10% stopped at 165v
- 5% stopped at 210v
- 3% stopped at 255v
- 3% stopped at 315v
- 3% stopped at 375v
- 65% went to 450v
What did basic replications find?
- replicated 24 times from 1963-85 in USA, Europe, Australia, Middle East
- modal findings is that 65% of participants go to 450v
What did the variations find?
- prediction (1%)
- basic study (67%)
- less prestigious institution (48%)
- same room as learner (40%)
- touching learner (30%)
- experimenter absent (22%)
- defiant model (10%)
What did the follow up on participants show?
- obtained feedback from 788/856 (92%)
- I was extremely upset (10%)
- I was somewhat nervous (50%)
- I was relatively calm (35%)
- I was completely calm (5%)
- I have been bothered by it quite a bit (7%)
- It has bothered me a little (29%)
- It has not bothered me at all (64%)
What are the ethical problems of the experiment?
- consent was given but could argue it wasn’t informed
- deception of participants can be justified
- possibility to stop participating wasn’t clear, use of prods made it seem forced
- extreme distress experienced by participants as well as later stress with how they view themselves and their self-esteem
- did follow up with participants though
What did the more ethical replication by Burger (2009) find?
- ‘Please continue’ (64% obeyed)
- ‘The experiment requires that you continue’ (46% obeyed)
- ‘It is absolutely essential that you continue’ (10% obeyed)
- ‘You have no other choice, you must continue’ (0% obeyed)
What key features did Milgram identify?
- readiness to relinquish
- entering the ‘agentic state’ (willingness to accept another’s definition of reality’
- concentric fields of influence (proximity)
What key features did Blass (2002) point out?
- help understand larger-scale events-incremental steps (going up in 15v feels less traumatic then big jumps)
- self-consistnecy
What does the social impact theory suggest?
- Latane 1981
- we’re influenced by authority figures as a function of their strength, immediacy, number
What does the social identity theory suggest?
- Turner 1991
- we’re influenced by authority figures to the extent that we identify with the group they represent
- we are influenced by their instructions to harm others to the extent that we don’t identify with those others
What is the impact and legacy of the study?
- informed debate in theology, ethics, management, law, history
- impact on scientific and public understanding of all ‘evil’ forms
- studying people in ‘natural’ experiments that mimic real-life
- ethical considerations around participant distress and long-term effects of participation
