Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
The holocaust essay examples 500 words
Holocaust Essay Examples
Zimbardo stanford prison experiment paper
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: The holocaust essay examples 500 words
We live in a society where each individual has their own set of thoughts and beliefs. Occasionally one will modify their beliefs and behavior to coincide with a group. This is an example of social influence. Social influence has three main components; conformity, compliance and obedience. The concept of compliance is similar to conformity, however there is a slight difference. Compliance only requires a person to perform a task. The person does not have to agree or disagree with the assignment, just simply complete it. Conformity requires the person being influenced to change their attitudes and or beliefs. An example of this aspect of social psychology is the holocaust in World War II. Adolph Eichmann was a Nazi officer responsible for filling up death camps in Germany. After the war he went on trial in Jerusalem for crimes against the Jewish people, crimes against humanity, and war crimes. On May 31, 1962, he was sentenced to death for the horrible crimes he committed. His defense was "Why me? Why not the local policemen, thousands of them? They would have been shot if they had refused to round up the Jews for the death camps. Why not hang them for not wanting to be shot? Why me? Everybody killed the Jews". A few months after the start of Eichmann’s trial, Stanley Milgram instituted an experiment testing ones obedience to authority. He wanted to find out if good people could do atrocious things if they were just obeying authority. Was Eichmann and millions of others in Nazi Germany decent people who were just following orders? Some other famous experiments that have taken place to test the waters of social psychology are Philip Zimbardo’s Stanford prison experiment and Solomon Asch’s conformity experiments, all ... ... middle of paper ... ...e maximum shock level dropped significantly. The more official the experimenter looked, the more people would reach the maximum shock level. Stanley Milgram’s findings were groundbreaking. He found that humans will comply and obey ones orders than previously thought. His experiment has become one of the more well known and influential social psychology experiments completed. In a society where one must often compromise their thoughts and beliefs to fit into the social norms of society, one must be careful not to alter their views and morals too much. The consequences can be devastating. Experiments from Stanley Milgram, Solomon Asch, and Philip Zimbardo all show the effects and consequences the modification of ones morals and beliefs can have. We must learn from the past and attempt to keep these experiments in mind when our morals or beliefs are on the line.
Milgram’s experiment basically states, “Be that as it may, you’d still probably commit heinous acts under the pressure of authority.” He also, found that obedience was the highest when the person giving the orders was nearby and was perceived as an authority figure, especially if they were from a prestigious institution. This was also true if the victim was depersonalized or placed at a distance such as in another room. Subjects were more likely to comply with orders if they didn’t see anyone else disobeying if there were no role models of defiance.
However, all of the participants continued to administer up to three-hundred volts. These were everyday “normal” people that functioned successfully in society. Slater had the opportunity to interview one of the participants of Milgram’s experiment, one which happened to follow through with the shocks all the way to the very last one. During the interview the participant stated, “You thought you were really giving shocks, and nothing can take away from you the knowledge of how you acted” (Slater, 59). These words came from the mouth of an “average joe” that never knew what he was capable of before the experiment. With these words, we are reminded that we are not as “nice” as we’d like to think we
In 1961, Stanley Milgram, an assistant professor of psychology at Yale University wanted to study and observe how people would react to authority if asked to continue on a task even if it meant hurting another human being. The experiment first began at night in a small shadowy room. For the experiment, it required three people, there was first the volunteer which was a random person from the street who was considered the teacher in the experiment. Then their was the two actors who Milgram had payed them to be in the experiment, one of the two actors was the leaner who was strapped to the electric
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.
In July of 1961, Stanley Milgram began his experiment of obedience. He first published an article, Behavioral Study of Obedience, in the Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology in 1963. This article, Behavioral Study of Obedience, is what this paper will be critiquing. He then wrote a book, Obedience to Authority: An Experimental View, in 1974 discussing his results in more detail. Milgram’s inspiration was the World War II and Adolf Hitler. During World War II, millions of innocent people were killed in a very organized manor. Milgram (1963) compares the organization and accuracy of the deaths, to the “efficiency as the manufacture of appliances” (p. 371). Milgram (1963) defines obedience as “the psychological mechanism that links individual action to political purpose” (p. 371). Milgram acknowledges that it may only take one person to come up with an idea, such as Hitler coming up with a way to eradicate the Jews, but would take an
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.
A former Yale psychologist, Stanley Milgram, administered an experiment to test the obedience of "ordinary" people as explained in his article, "The Perils of Obedience". An unexpected outcome came from this experiment by watching the teacher administer shocks to the learner for not remembering sets of words. By executing greater shocks for every wrong answer created tremendous stress and a low comfort levels within the "teacher", the one being observed unknowingly, uncomfortable and feel the need to stop. However, with Milgram having the experimenter insisting that they must continue for the experiments purpose, many continued to shock the learner with much higher voltages.The participants were unaware of many objects of the experiment until
Stanley Milgram’s experiment shows societies that more people with abide by the rules of an authority figure under any circumstances rather than follow their own nature instinct. With the use of his well-organized article that appeals to the general public, direct quotes and real world example, Milgram’s idea is very well-supported. The results of the experiment were in Milgram’s favor and show that people are obedient to authority figures. Stanley Milgram shows the reader how big of an impact authority figures have but fails to answer the bigger question. Which is more important, obedience or morality?
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.
“It may be that we are puppets-puppets controlled by the strings of society. But at least we are puppets with perception, with awareness. And perhaps our awareness is the first step to our liberation.” Stanley Milgram made ground breaking discoveries in the field of psychology with his many experiments on obedience and people’s ability to have an effect on the actions of others. From one of his experiments was derived “The Six Degrees of Separation,” which is still studied today in psychology classes (Biography). He would come to be known as, “the man who shocked the world,” with a single experiment.
Society is ever changing and the people are just the same. Throughout history, it is shown that people change and mold to their surroundings. But when a deeper look is taken it is revealed that there is a minority that is unwilling or unable to fit these standards as most people do. These people tend to be forced into seclusion or made to fend for themselves. This is shown through the colonization of America and up into more recent times. The Native Americans are the first to make a life on this land, and when the English set up a new society, the Natives are forced onto smaller and smaller plots of land until forced to conform or to live on a reservation. The idea of this societal conformity is shown in “What You Pawn I Will Redeem” by Sherman Alexie, a short story author. Society's pressure to improve an individual living differently is hurting more than it is helping.
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.
Milgram invented a shock generator that looked to be very intimidating. He had a theory that someone in a position of power could influence someone else to shock another person. The test subjects who went up to thirty on the shocks were called obedient subjects and those who stopped before thirty were called defiant subjects.
How do other people influence our behaviour? The public may influence our behaviour though social influence in two different ways, the first is normative influence which is “an influence to conform to the positive expectations of others” (Cohen 1964). This is shown by Asch where the participant’s task was to compare the length of the lines by matching the standard line with three comparisons, one of which was clearly obvious the correct answer this is known as an unambiguous task. Asch found that when the majority of the confederate said the wrong answer the minority who was the participant also gave the wrong answer knowing it wasn’t correct (Asch 1956) this shows how they changed their answer to fit in with the group even when they knew the answer they was giving was incorrect. This can be applied to behaviours being influenced by others as people may go along with the group and behave the same way they do even if it’s seen to be frowned upon just to fit in.
The study was done at Yale University by the psychologist Stanley Milgram. The study assessed the willingness of men from various jobs and levels of education, to obey an authority figure who directed them to follow through with actions that conflicted with their personal conscience. The study found that most of the participants were willing to inflict both injury and affliction even though it went against their moral compass. Two concepts came out of Milgram’s experiment, the theory of conformity and agentic state theory. The first concept conformity described the person who could not make decisions so would leave it up to the group. The second theory agentic was that people who carried out the wishes of the person in charge that they were no longer responsible for their actions. I also recalled the Stanford Prison experiment conducted by Phillip Zimbardo. The goal of the experiment was to shift the power between the guards and the prisoners, creating a sense of powerlessness and power shift. In both experiments the participant’s submitted to social pressure, reinforced by permitting some participants to feel more powerful than