Milgram Experiments Summary

Kat Allen

Isbell

Composition I

25 November 2015

Obligation to Obey: Moral Values of the Milgram Experiments

In 1963, Stanley Milgram conducted an experiment that was one of the most controversial of his time, and of ours. “The subjects—or ‘teachers’—were instructed to administer [electroshocks] to a human ‘learner,’ with the shocks becoming progressively more powerful and painful” (Collins, para. 1, Book Overview). The subjects watched as the “learner” was strapped into a chair. When the experimenter asked if either of the two had a question, the “learner” mentioned he had a heart problem. The “teacher” heard this, as well, and still continued to go through with the experiment. told that they were to read a series of paired words, and “learners”

He did not fully disclose the fact that the “learner” was not receiving any electric shocks, as well as the true purpose behind the experiment. To make the experiment more of a reality to the “teachers” he gave them a real electric shock on one of the lower voltages, to give them an idea of what pain the “learner” would be experiencing. Diana Baumrind in her article “Is Milgram’s Deception Research Ethically Acceptable?” she writes, “Lying to subjects when obtaining ‘informed’ consent violates the right of prospective subjects” (Baumrind, para.3). On the contrary, Saul McLeod, who has a “degree in psychology and have a masters degree in research,” (simplypsychology,org), writes in his article, The Milgram Experiment “[h]owever, Milgram argued that ‘illusion is used when necessary in order to set the stage for the revelation of certain difficult-to-get-at-truths’. [(Milgram, para. 43-44)]” (McLeod, para. 1, Ethical Issues). In the 1960s there was no mandatory ethical rules of conduct, there was only suggestions that did not have to be taken. Taking this into account, I believe that the way that Milgram went about the proposition of the experiment was deceitful. Especially given the fact that Milgram shocked the “teacher,” and the “learner” was an actor that was never

Milgram argues that since the true nature of the study was about obedience, orders were necessary in order to be successful or to gather usable data. As stated previously, there were no mandatory laws in place as far as deception goes. However, in the 1960s there was a law in place, written by the British Psychological Society that stated that “states that researchers should make it plain to participants that they are free to withdraw at any time” (McLeod, para. 9, Ethical Issues). Still, Milgram disregarded this with his argument and used the following prompts to discourage the subjects from withdrawing from the