Milgram's Obedience Study and Destructive Obedience

Study Notes

Study by Milgram on obedience, part of the social approach syllabus, along with studies by Pavin and Perry
Obedience defined as compliance with orders or requests from an authority figure
Agentic state: Serving as an agent to authority, giving up free will to obey
Autonomous state: Choosing to act on own free will, not being obedient to authority
Destructive obedience: Obeying orders to cause harm to others knowingly
Background of the study: Conducted in the 1960s, influenced by events of World War II and Adolf Hitler's authority
Milgram's aim to investigate obedience and test if it was situational rather than individual nature like Germans during WWII
Preliminary notion: Experts predicted low levels of destructive obedience among Americans in a hypothetical study scenario
Aim of the study: To test obedience to authority resulting in harm to others, specifically measuring maximum shock levels administered
Study conducted as a controlled observation at Yale University, using a fake shock generator with varying voltage levels up to 450 volts
Sample: 40 male participants aged 20 to 50, diverse occupational backgrounds, postgraduates selected over undergraduates- Participants in the study consisted of 38% skilled and unskilled workers, 40% white-collar workers, and 22% professional workers, showing a diverse occupational background.
The study had a small sample size of 40 participants, limiting the generalizability of the findings.
Participants were recruited through a volunteer sample, with an ad placed by Milgram offering $4.50 for participation, ensuring specific eligibility criteria.
The study used deception by providing a fake aim to avoid demand characteristics, aiming to test levels of destructive obedience.
The fake aim mentioned testing the effects of punishment on memory and learning, while the actual aim was to observe obedience to authority figures in administering electric shocks.
Participants were told they would be paid even if they didn't complete the study, preventing the influence of money on their decision to continue.
The study involved a word pair task where one participant (teacher) administered electric shocks to another (learner) for incorrect answers, believing it would enhance memory.
Roles of teacher and learner were allocated randomly, but in reality, both slips said "teacher," ensuring the actual participant would always be the teacher.
The learner (a stooge) was strapped to an electric chair, with electrodes connected to a shock generator, creating a realistic but fake setup.
To reinforce the realism, participants were given a 45-volt shock to test the machine, leading them to overestimate its intensity (75-100 volts), highlighting the perceived severity of the shocks.- Participants were made to believe they were administering electric shocks to a learner in a study on obedience.
The learner was actually a confederate, and the shocks were not real.
The learner was instructed to give incorrect responses intentionally to allow participants to administer electric shocks and follow a protocol.
The shock levels increased with each incorrect response, reaching 105 volts after seven wrong answers.
Participants were urged to continue giving shocks through verbal prods in case they hesitated or refused.
The experiment involved deception, including pre-recorded responses from the confederate to standardize the procedure.
At 300 volts, the confederate would simulate extreme pain by pounding on the wall.
At 315 volts, the learner stopped responding altogether.
Participants were debriefed at the end of the study to alleviate any stress or psychological harm caused by the experiment.
The study revealed that 65% of participants administered the maximum 450-volt shock despite initial predictions of only 1.2% compliance.
Qualitative data was gathered through observations and recordings of participant behavior and emotional responses during the study.