The Milgram Experiment Method - Research Paper Example

? The Milgram Experiment Introduction Probably the most well known experiments in psychology the Milgram experiment took place in 1961-1962. Stanley Milgram who was a psychologist at Yale University wanted to study how willing a person is, to obey instructions to perform acts which conflicted with the person’s conscience from an authority figure. Milgram set-up an experiment where he tested the levels of obedience, to a person subjected to painful electric shocks with increasing levels and ordered to punish another person. This experiment brought about disturbing findings, which fascinated and at the same time shocked the scientific community. This research paper will concentrate on discussing the Milgram experiment, the method used in this experiment and the results of the experiment. Literature review Most people would answer no, when ordered by a person in authority to deliver an electrical shock of 400-volts to another person, but Stanley Milgram conducted obedience experiments that showed results which were surprising. Experiments like this offer a disturbing and powerful look in the power of obedience and authority. Shortly after the trial of Adolph Eichmann had begun who was a World War II criminal Milgram started his experiments. Adolph Eichmann’s defense roused Milgram’s interest when he said he was following instructions when he ordered millions of Jews to be killed. "Could it be true that Eichmann and his were just following orders accomplices during the Holocaust? Could we call them all accomplices?" (Milgram, 1974); this is the question Milgram posed in his book Obedience to Authority. The Milgram Experiment method The Milgram experiment involved 40 participants who were men who were recruited in for exchange for $4.50 due to their participation. In this experiment, Milgram had to develop a shock generator that was intimidating. This shock generator had shock levels that started at 30-volts and had an increment of 15-volt up to 450-volts. Switches had terms labeled slight shock, moderate shock, severe shock and finally two switches that were labeled XXX. Each of the participants took the role of a teacher delivering a shock to a student each time there was a production of an incorrect answer. Participants in this case thought that they delivered ideal shocks to the respective student, while actually the student in the experiment was pretending to get a shock. The participant heard the learner plead for a release or complain of a heart condition as the experiment progressed. After reaching the 300-volts level, the learner had a demand to be released and banged on the wall. The learner refused to answer and remained silent, refusing to answer more questions. Milgram, who was the experimenter, then gave instructions to the participant to deliver another shock when there is silence treating silence as a response that is incorrect. Most of these participants asked Milgram whether to continue delivering these shocks. Then Milgram issued a series of commands to determine what the participant would follow his orders. Milgram first commanded the participant to continue delivering shocks; he then commanded them that the experiment required that they continue delivering shocks. He then commanded them that it was essential that they continued delivering these shocks. Finally, he commanded them that they had no other choice but to continue delivering those shocks. In his book Obedience to Authority Milgram quotes that social psychology reveals a lesson that not what kind of person a man is, but the kind of a situation in which he can be, that determine the action of a person, (Milgram, 1974). Milgram Experiment results The measure of obedience was determined by the levels of shock that participants were willing to subject to the learner. Milgram once posed a question to a group of students at Yale University as to how far they thought most participants were willing to go. The prediction was that not more than 3 percent of the participants would deliver the severe shock but shockingly 65 percent of the participants delivered the severe shock. The rest of the participants stopped before reaching the severe shock. Subjects in this experiment became extremely angry at the experimenter, but ironically they followed orders that were given to them. These subjects were debriefed by the use of deception and in explaining the procedures at the end of that experiment. Critics have argued that the exact nature of Milgram Experiment confused many of the participants. A survey conducted by Milgram to the participants showed that 1 percent regretted to have participated, and an overwhelming 84 percent were glad to have been in the list of participants. Milgram Experiment discussion Milgram’s experiment brought about serious ethical questions because he accidentally gives the vital truth that the shocks are harmless. These findings of Milgram’s research were found to hold true by Thomas Blass (1999) who further researched on obedience. According to Milgram, there were factors that explained obedience in the seemingly sadistic act of an authority figure. Some of these factors included the presence of the authority figure which increased compliance, many participants believed that the experiment was safe since it was sponsored by Yale University, the selection of teacher-student (learner) status seemed random, there was an assumption that the experimenter was competent, and finally the shocks were not dangerous but only painful. Many people found the electrical shocks abhorrent, but in scientific knowledge, it is acceptable to have certain levels of harmless pain. In view of this study, Milgram suggested that one major factor in the Holocaust was the willingness to obeying the authorities even if it was a ‘wrong’ obedience. Milgram proved that belief and fear were not the only factors that were motivating in obedience. This was due to subjects were not subjected to any wrath of superiors in disobeying unlike the Nazi’s excuse of fearing the wrath of the superiors if they disobeyed their commands. Milgram’s experiment is important in showing that in a situation with social constraints; there could be an easy trample of people’s moral sense. This experiment has an outstanding classical effect in psychology as it shows some of the dangers of obedience. Psychologists argue that internal and external factors are an excellent example of the overall temperament and beliefs that influence heavily on obedience. In this experiment, situational variables outweighed personality factors when determining obedience. Conclusion The results from the experiment show that, in spite of all participants knowing that the shocks were not real; these participants saw a situation of behavioral and unreal physiological levels. This has an effect of opening further obedience research studies through employment of environments that are virtually made. References Baron, R.A. and Byrne, D. (1994). Social Psychology: Understanding Human Interaction. Boston: Allyn and Bacon. Blass, T. (2000). Obedience to authority: Current perspectives on the Milgram paradigm. New Jersey: Mahwah. Elms, A.C. (2009). Obedience Lite, American Psychologist, 64(1). Milgram, S. (1963). Behavioural Study of Obedience. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 67. Milgram, S. (1965). Some Conditions of Obedience and Disobedience to Authority. Human relations, 18(1). Milgram, S. (1973). The perils of obedience. Harper’s Magazine. Milgram, S. (1974). Obedience to authority: An experimental view. Harpercollins. Read More