The student and teacher were placed in separate rooms and an instructor was placed in the same room as the teacher. He would then attempt to convince the teacher to continue the experiment even if the student starts crying out or wanting to leave. The teacher was required to “shock” the student if they said an incorrect answer. However, the ‘shocks’ became more intense and came with each incorrect answer. They eventually started getting very dangerous and potentially life threatening.
The teacher would be the lab rat thinking he was administering a shock for each fallacious response, and with each erroneous reply the shock would intensify. The astonishing fact was all participants would continue to 300 volts, which would precipitate extreme torment. Furthermore, two-thirds would proceed on to shock the learner with 450 volts, which would result in death, hypothetically.
In the experiment, Milgram uses purposeful deception as the teacher is the naive subject and is told they are participating in a memory and learner psychology experiment and are in charge of delivering shocks to the learner, who, in fact, is an actor. The majority of the participants in the study were obedient to the experimenter even though the experimenter "did not threaten the subjects with punishments such as loss of income, community ostracism or jail for failure to obey. Neither could he offer incentives" (Milgram 651). Despite having nothing to gain, the subjects continued participating in the experiment. The participants continued to administer shocks to the student because they were instructed to
1. What rationale do the author(s) give for conducting the study? The author that is conducting this research is testing the obedience of a subject when dealing with “stocking a victim” by use of a shock generator. There are thirty levels of shock that are generated varying from a slight shock to a severe shock.
The first run had the learner get 3 answers correct and 7 answers wrong, resulting in a shock of 105 volts. In the second run, the teacher was told to read a list of words until the learner got the correct pair which meant that the teacher would have to increase the voltage up to 450 volts which were labeled as “Danger Severe Shock”. At around 300 volts the learner would start kicking against the wall and not respond to the teacher anymore. If the teacher failed to shock the learner the experimenter would give 4 responses that urged the teacher to administer the shock. The experimenter would either say “ Please Continue”, “The experiment requires that you continue”, “It is essential that you continue”, or finally “ You have no other choice you must go on”.
Psychologist, Stanley Milgram, wanted to know if people would cause harm on other humans simply because they were ordered to do so (he was inspired by Nazi soldiers, who corrected their actions in World War II by saying they were just following orders). Milgram designed an experiment where participants were told they were testing a learning technique, where a student had to learn a word pattern, and were punished by electric shock if they got the answer wrong. The “student” was an assistant of Milgram’s, but the participant, who was the “teacher” and the person to give the electric shock, thought this person was just an innocent participant. The teacher would read out a question, and if the student (who sat in an adjacent room, where they
In Milgram’s experiment, the longer the teachers were under the influence of the experimenter, the easier it became for them to shock the learner. A specific example of this would be from Fred Prozi, whose results were extremely dramatic. Once the experiment had begun and the learner started to show discomfort from the shocks, Prozi half-heartedly refused to continue. All it took was a little push from the experimenter and the confirmation of having no liability if anything were to happen to get Prozi to continue to give the learner all 450 volts (582-584). Both of these experiments call attention to how easy it is for people to obey a higher authority based on what kind of situation they are
Would people actually issue a shock that could be potentially fatal to the person they are issuing the test to? The biggest part of this was the influence of the “professor” that was in the room with the “teachers”. Whenever a particularly large shock was issued to the “learner” he would cry out in pain. This caused several people to question whether
Deception from a moral viewpoint would be something that is seen as wrong, but in a study or experiment for research I think deception is something that is necessary to gain certain knowledge that we wouldn 't be able to gain using regular methods. Usually, the ends justify the means to a deceptive experiments and they usually have good intentions behind them. Many people may be angry after the experiment is over but it is shown that people enjoy an experiment with deception more than an experiment without deception; and people also benefit from them more, educationally. I believe deception is a necessary tool for learning about human behavior and human reaction. Deceptive experiments are experiments that really make you think when the experiment
Subjects were told to shock a person who they believed to also be a subject if they answered a question wrong. The people getting shocked were actors and were not actually receiving electrical shocks. Many of the subjects continued to give high voltage shocks because they were told to. This experiment was viewed as unethical because of the emotional stress it put on the subjects.
Many people who learn about obedience research have been able to stand up to arbitrary or unjust authority. People who get to know the purpose of the experiment make them felt Betrayed, Upsetting, Traumatized, Guilty, Embarrassing, Shock, and see them questioning their Self-image. And the people who stopped and refuses to go on felt Relief, Annoyed, Proud, Satisfied, Positive. So to get rid of this feeling we can resist the pressure of authority by questioning the authority, Asking yourself “is this something that I would do on my own?” , don't follow blindly someone, if you think that it is not right, or you felt uneasy about.
Stanley Milgram’s All I can say to these experiments is “Wow” to me I saw it as inhumane. The interviews confirmed that an everyday normal person can cause pain and suffering to another. Milgram also noticed that the inclination toward a particular characteristic or type of behavior of the teacher was to devalue or demean the learner, to help to internally justify the teacher’s behavior of continuing to conduct the shocks in which it helped to continue the process of the experiment. The experiment gave an enormous amount of insight into the human behavior and the human obedience.
Participants were ordered to ask the learners a series of questions, and if they got them incorrect, they would give them a shock which gradually got more powerful with each question that they missed. The learner was really just a voice recording, so there was not anyone truly being shocked, but the teachers were under the impression that the experiment was real. Each time the learner got a question wrong, the teacher shocked the learner. The learner would wince from pain, and it would get louder and more aggressive as the experiment went on. Some of the participants wanted to stop the experiment because they didn't want
The "Obedience to Authority Paradigm" abbreviated as OTA has been a field of interest for psychologists, sociologists and countless others who till this very day try to create a comprehensive and holistic theory of obedience. According to Jetten and Mols (2014), Milgram designed an experiment to yield the highest obedience rates and to decrease or even omit disobedience, resulting in the predicted outcomes after having had a vast amount of pilot
During the Stanford prison experiment the actual boys who agreed to do the experiment had no idea what it was, they thought it would be a fun idea to help out with an experiment. The only reason why the experiment stopped after only a week was because a women who was one of the people behind it saw the prisoners walking to the bathroom and they had bags on their heads and they were in single file and she got upset. She was upset because they lost the purpose of the experiment and actually turned these boys into
