Podcast
Questions and Answers
What was the primary goal of Stanley Milgram's experiment?
What was the primary goal of Stanley Milgram's experiment?
What percentage of participants administered the maximum 450-volt shock?
What percentage of participants administered the maximum 450-volt shock?
What was the role of the actor in the experiment?
What was the role of the actor in the experiment?
What was the age range of the participants in the experiment?
What was the age range of the participants in the experiment?
Signup and view all the answers
What was the increment in voltage after each incorrect answer?
What was the increment in voltage after each incorrect answer?
Signup and view all the answers
What was the key finding of the experiment?
What was the key finding of the experiment?
Signup and view all the answers
What was the inspiration behind Milgram's experiment?
What was the inspiration behind Milgram's experiment?
Signup and view all the answers
What is one of the implications of the experiment?
What is one of the implications of the experiment?
Signup and view all the answers
Study Notes
Destructive Obedience: Stanley Milgram Experiment
Background
- Conducted by Stanley Milgram in 1961 at Yale University
- Investigated the conflict between obedience to authority and personal morals
- Inspired by the Nazi war crimes and the role of obedience in the Holocaust
Experiment Design
- 40 male participants, aged 20-50, from various occupations
- Participants were paired with another person (an actor) and told to administer electric shocks to the other person each time they answered a question incorrectly
- Participants were told the experiment was to study the effects of punishment on learning
- The actor was not actually receiving shocks, but pretended to be in pain
Procedure
- Participants were instructed to increase the voltage of the shock by 15 volts after each incorrect answer
- The actor would protest and express pain as the voltage increased
- Participants were encouraged by the experimenter to continue administering shocks, despite their reservations
Results
- 65% of participants administered the maximum 450-volt shock, despite the actor's pleas to stop
- Many participants showed signs of distress and anxiety, but continued to obey the experimenter's instructions
- Only 1 participant refused to continue at the 150-volt level
Key Findings
- Obedience to authority can lead individuals to engage in destructive behavior
- People are more likely to obey an authority figure, even if it goes against their personal morals
- The presence of an authority figure can reduce personal responsibility and increase the likelihood of obedience
Implications
- Highlights the dangers of blind obedience and the importance of critical thinking
- Provides insight into the psychological mechanisms underlying destructive obedience
- Has implications for our understanding of human behavior in situations like the Holocaust, Abu Ghraib, and other atrocities
Stanley Milgram Experiment
Background
- Conducted in 1961 at Yale University to investigate the conflict between obedience to authority and personal morals
- Inspired by the Nazi war crimes and the role of obedience in the Holocaust
Experiment Design
- 40 male participants, aged 20-50, from various occupations were paired with an actor
- Participants were told to administer electric shocks to the actor for each incorrect answer, with the goal of studying punishment on learning
- The actor pretended to receive shocks and expressed pain as voltage increased
Procedure
- Participants increased voltage by 15 volts after each incorrect answer
- Actor protested and expressed pain, while participants were encouraged by the experimenter to continue
Results
- 65% of participants administered the maximum 450-volt shock despite the actor's pleas
- Participants showed signs of distress and anxiety, but continued to obey the experimenter
- Only 1 participant refused to continue at the 150-volt level
Key Findings
- Obedience to authority can lead individuals to engage in destructive behavior
- People obey authority figures even if it goes against their personal morals
- Authority figures reduce personal responsibility and increase obedience likelihood
Implications
- Highlights the dangers of blind obedience and the importance of critical thinking
- Provides insight into psychological mechanisms underlying destructive obedience
- Has implications for understanding human behavior in situations like the Holocaust and Abu Ghraib
Studying That Suits You
Use AI to generate personalized quizzes and flashcards to suit your learning preferences.
Description
Explore the famous psychology experiment that investigated the conflict between obedience to authority and personal morals, and its relation to the Holocaust.
