Stanley Milgram Case Study

728 Words2 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: The perils of obedience

In 1963, Stanley Milgram of Yale University created one of the most well- known and famous studies on obedience. Milgram conducted this study in order to figure out if there were similarities involving obedience in the systematic killing of Jews from 1933 to 1945. The question Milgram was trying to answer was whether the Nazi's excuse for the murders of millions was a valid excuse and if the mass killings were because of orders the Nazi’s obeyed. According to Milgram, “obedience is the psychological mechanism that links individual action to political purpose”. Essentially obedience means compliance with an order, request, or law or submission to another's authority. Obedience in society is both a good and bad thing in terms of it being an act of kindness or in terms of it being destruction. Milgram then creates a procedure consisting of a subject shocking a victim. This electric shock is caused by a generator used with 30 marked voltage levels that all range from 15 to 450 volts. In other words, these shocks vary from “Slight shock to Danger: Severe Shock”. The subject administers these shocks to the victim and if at a certain point in the experiment the subject refuses to go on with the experiment resulting in the act of "disobedience". Continuing the experiment is considered “obedience”. The subjects of his experiment were 40 males from New Haven and the surrounding areas. Participants all were from ages 20 to 50. Subjects responded from a newspaper advertisement and mail solicitations and believed that they were participating in a study of memory and learning at Yale. The men of this study all had a wide variety of jobs and all ranged in education levels. The men were paid $4.50 to participate in the study and no matter the ... ... middle of paper ... ...res; it is how we are raised to obey authority such as parents or teachers. Some have argued that individuals today are more aware of the dangers of following authority than they were in the early 1960s. This experiment is biased because the participants are all male and all were volunteers. Milgram points out that the majority of the subjects knew what they were doing was not right or moral. Opting out of the experiment would be wrong on the victim’s part because they agreed to go through even after they knew they were going to be the victim. Overall, disobedience was hard to do in an experiment such as this once. Participants felt as though they had a duty to fulfill this study and that they had to go through with it. Participants put their morals aside for this experiment which is why the outcome of victims that made it to the final series of shocks was so high.

Show More
Related

  • A Summary of "The Perils of Obedience"

    525 Words  | 2 Pages

    In "The Perils of Obedience," Stanley Milgram conducted a study that tests the conflict between obedience to authority and one's own conscience. Through the experiments, Milgram discovered that the majority of people would go against their own decisions of right and wrong to appease the requests of an authority figure. The study was set up as a "blind experiment" to capture if and when a person will stop inflicting pain on another as they are explicitly commanded to continue. The participants of this experiment included two willing individuals: a teacher and a learner. The teacher is the real subject and the learner is merely an actor.

    Read More

  • An Experiment on Obedience in The Pearl´s of Obedience by Stanley Milgram

    638 Words  | 2 Pages

    In this article “The Pearls of Obedience”, Stanley Milgram asserts that obedience to authority is a common response for many people in today’s society, often diminishing an individuals beliefs or ideals. Stanley Milgram designs an experiment to understand how strong a person’s tendency to obey authority is, even though it is amoral or destructive. Stanley Milgram bases his experiment on three people: a learner, teacher, and experimenter. The experimenter is simply an overseer of the experiment, and is concerned with the outcome of punishing the learner. The teacher, who is the subject of the experiment, is made to believe the electrical shocks are real; he is responsible for obeying the experimenter and punishing the learner for incorrect answers by electrocuting him from an electric shock panel that increases from 15 to 450 volts.

    Read More

  • Review of Stanley Milgram’s Experiments on Obedience, by Diana Baumrind and Obedience, by Ian Parker

    890 Words  | 2 Pages

    Upon analyzing his experiment, Stanley Milgram, a Yale psychologist, concludes that people will drive to great lengths to obey orders given by a higher authority. The experiment, which included ordinary people delivering “shocks” to an unknown subject, has raised many questions in the psychological world. Diana Baumrind, a psychologist at the University of California and one of Milgram’s colleagues, attacks Milgram’s ethics after he completes his experiment in her review. She deems Milgram as being unethical towards the subjects he uses for testing and claims that his experiment is irrelevant to obedience. In contrast, Ian Parker, a writer for New Yorker and Human Sciences, asserts Milgram’s experiments hold validity in the psychological world. While Baumrind focuses on Milgram’s ethics, Parker concentrates more on the reactions, both immediate and long-term, to his experiments.

    Read More

  • The Perils of Obedience, by Stanley Milgram

    1490 Words  | 3 Pages

    If a person of authority ordered you to inflict a 15 to 400 volt electrical shock on another innocent human being, would you follow your direct orders? That is the question that Stanley Milgram, a psychologist at Yale University, tested in the 1960’s. Most people would answer “no,” to imposing pain on innocent human beings, but Milgram wanted to go further with his study. Writing and Reading across the Curriculum holds a shortened edition of Stanley Milgram’s “The Perils of Obedience,” where he displays an eye-opening experiment that tests the true obedience of people under authority figures.

    Read More

  • Milgram Obedience Analysis

    738 Words  | 2 Pages

    In “ Review of Stanley Milgram’s Experiments On Obedience” by Diana Baumrind, and in “Obedience” by Ian Parker, the writers claim that Milgram’s Obedience is ethically wrong and work of evil because of the potential harm that the subjects of the experiment had. While Baumrind’s article focused only on the Subjects of the experiment, Parker’s article talked about both immediate and long term response to experiment along with the reaction of both the general public and Milgram’s colleagues, he also talks about the effect of the experiment on Milgram himself. Both articles discuss has similar points, they also uses Milgram’s words against him and while Baumrind attacks Milgram, Parker shows the reader that experiment

    Read More

  • Power Of Situations In The Milgram Experiment

    710 Words  | 2 Pages

    The experiment was to see if people would follow the orders of an authority figure, even if the orders that were given proved to cause pain to the person taking the test. In the “Milgram Experiment” by Saul McLeod, he goes into detail about six variations that changed the percentage of obedience from the test subject, for example, one variable was that the experiment was moved to set of run down offices rather than at Yale University. Variables like these changed the results dramatically. In four of these variations, the obedience percentage was under 50 percent (588). This is great evidence that it is the situation that changes the actions of the individual, not he or she’s morals.

    Read More

  • Summary Of The Stanley Milgram's Obedience

    1310 Words  | 3 Pages

    The Stanley Milgram “Obedience” Study was an experiment conducted at Yale University in 1962 by Milgram, who’s goal was to test the power of obedience to authority. Milgram was in search to understand how the Nazis, who were normal German citizens, could willingly inflict pain onto innocent people. In order to find the answer to this, Milgram decided to perform a research that measured the willingness of an ordinary individual to commit cruel acts on a civilian. The experiment had an intricate set up which involved three participants that all had a different role. There was the “teacher”, “learner”, and “authoritative figure” who was dressed in a lab coat and posed as a scientist. The learner and authoritative figure were actors who were

    Read More

  • Stanley Milgram And Philip Zimbardo's The Lucifer Effect

    1033 Words  | 3 Pages

    Though many people are capable of resisting the acts, but not everyone. Peer pressure is a form of situationism, kids are always more likely to do things that they wont normally do because of peer pressure. If there are a lot of people around and encouraging a person, they are a lot more likely to follow through than if it was just themselves or a couple of other people. When someone is in the presence of an authority figure (like in the Milgram experiment) they are more likely to do what that person says just because they are of authority. During the Milgram experiment the people conducting the experiment wore lab coats, so they were seen as legitimate. If someone had just come in there wearing street clothes, there might not have been as many people to follow through with administering the shocks. This shows how just minor things like that can change how willingly we are to do certain things. The situation a person is in can make them do change their whole behavior, and make them do things they would never normally do. If a parent is in the situation of trying to protect their child, they might do things that are not like them in order to keep their child safe from

    Read More

  • The Milgram Experiment of The 1960s

    1238 Words  | 3 Pages

    The Milgram experiment of the 1960s was designed to ascertain why so many Germans decided to support the Nazi cause. It sought to determine if people would be willing to contradict their conscience if they were commanded to do so by someone in authority. This was done with a psychologist commanding a teacher to administer an electric shock to a student each time a question was answered incorrectly. The results of the Milgram experiment help to explain why so many men in Nazi Germany were recruited to support the Nazi cause and serve as a warning against the use of “enhanced interrogation” techniques by the United States government.

    Read More

  • Perils Of Obedience

    366 Words  | 1 Pages

    In finding that people are not naturally aggressive. Milgram now alters the experiment to find out why do people act the way they do. He compiled the experiment to answer, why do people obey authority, even when the actions are against their own morals.

    Read More

  • Analysis of Article If Hitler Asked You To Electrocute A Stranger, Would You? Probably

    1026 Words  | 3 Pages

    At first Milgram believed that the idea of obedience under Hitler during the Third Reich was appalling. He was not satisfied believing that all humans were like this. Instead, he sought to prove that the obedience was in the German gene pool, not the human one. To test this, Milgram staged an artificial laboratory "dungeon" in which ordinary citizens, whom he hired at $4.50 for the experiment, would come down and be required to deliver an electric shock of increasing intensity to another individual for failing to answer a preset list of questions. Meyer describes the object of the experiment "is to find the shock level at which you disobey the experimenter and refuse to pull the switch" (Meyer 241). Here, the author is paving the way into your mind by introducing the idea of reluctance and doubt within the reader. By this point in the essay, one is probably thinking to themselves, "Not me. I wouldn't pull the switch even once." In actuality, the results of the experiment contradict this forerunning belief.

    Read More

  • Milgram's The Perils Of Obedience By Diana Baaumrind

    745 Words  | 2 Pages

    Obedience is when you do something you have been asked or ordered to do by someone in authority. As little kids we are taught to follow the rules of authority, weather it is a positive or negative effect. Stanley Milgram, the author of “The perils of Obedience” writes his experiment about how people follow the direction of an authority figure, and how it could be a threat. On the other hand Diana Baumrind article “Review of Stanley Milgram’s experiments on obedience,” is about how Milgram’s experiment was inhumane and how it is not valid. While both authors address how people obey an authority figure, Milgram focuses more on how his experiment was successful while Baumrind seems more concerned more with how Milgram’s experiment was flawed and

    Read More

  • Asch And Milgram's Experiment Essay

    627 Words  | 2 Pages

    Asch and Milgram’s experiment was unethical in their methods of not informing the participant of the details surrounding the experiment and the unwarranted stress; their experiment portrayed the circumstances of real life situation surrounding the issues of obedience to authority and social influence. In life, we are not given the courtesy of knowledge when we are being manipulated or influenced to act or think a certain way, let us be honest here because if we did know people were watching and judging us most of us would do exactly as society sees moral, while that may sound good in ensuring that we always do the right thing that would not be true to the ways of our reality. Therefore, by not telling the participants the details of the experiment and inflicting unwarranted stress, Asch and Milgram’s replicated the reality of life. In “Options and Social Pressure” Solomon E. Asch conducts an experiment to show the power of social influence, by using the lengths of sticks that the participants had to match up with the best fit, Asch then developed different scenarios to see how great the power of influence is, but what he discovered is that people always conformed to the majority regardless of how big or small the error was the individual always gave in to the power of the majority.

    Read More

  • Analysis Of Stanley Milgram's Behavioral Study Of Obedience

    1241 Words  | 3 Pages

    It is human nature to respect and obey elders or authoritative figures, even when it may result in harm to oneself or others. Stanley Milgram, an American social psychologist, conducted an experiment to test the reasoning behind a person’s obedience. He uses this experiment in hope to gain a better understanding behind the reason Hitler was so successful in manipulating the Germans along with why their obedience continued on such extreme levels. Milgram conducts a strategy similar to Hitler’s in attempt to test ones obedience. Diana Baumrind, a clinical and developmental psychologist, disagreed with Milgram’s experiment in her article, ”Some Thoughts on Ethics of Research: After Reading Milgram’s “Behavioral Study of obedience”, Baumrind explains

    Read More

  • Blindly Obeying Authority

    1789 Words  | 4 Pages

    Individuals often yield to conformity when they are forced to discard their individual freedom in order to benefit the larger group. Despite the fact that it is important to obey the authority, obeying the authority can sometimes be hazardous especially when morals and autonomous thought are suppressed to an extent that the other person is harmed. Obedience usually involves doing what a rule or a person tells you to but negative consequences can result from displaying obedience to authority for example; the people who obeyed the orders of Adolph Hitler ended up killing innocent people during the Holocaust. In the same way, Stanley Milgram noted in his article ‘Perils of Obedience’ of how individuals obeyed authority and neglected their conscience reflecting how this can be destructive in experiences of real life. On the contrary, Diana Baumrind pointed out in her article ‘Review of Stanley Milgram’s Experiments on Obedience’ that the experiments were not valid hence useless.

    Read More

More about Stanley Milgram Case Study

Open Document