OBEDIENCE

Module 75

OBEDIENCE

• Obedience:
• compliance of person is due to perceived authority of asker
• request is perceived as a command
• Milgram interested in unquestioning obedience to orders

STANLEY MILGRAM’S STUDIES

Basic study procedure

• teacher and learner (learner always confederate)
• watch learner being strapped into chair
• learner expresses concern over his “heart condition”

STANLEY MILGRAM’S STUDIES: PROCEDURE CONTINUED

• Teacher goes to another room with experimenter
• Shock generator panel – 15 to 450 volts, labels “slight shock” to “XXX”
• Teacher asked by Experimenter to give higher shocks for every mistake Learner makes

STANLEY MILGRAM’S STUDIES

• Learner protests more and more as shock increases
• Experimenter continues to request obedience even if teacher balks saying,
• “The Experiment Requires that you continue.”
• “You have no other choice, you must continue.”

MILGRAM’S RESULTS

• How many people would go to the highest shock level?
• Two-Thirds or 65% (26 out of 40) of the subjects went to the end, even those that protested
• Those that did stop, not one stopped before the 300-volt level.

MILGRAM’S OBEDIENCE TO AUTHORITY�(DATA FROM MILGRAM, 1974)

OBEDIENCE TO AUTHORITY

• Click HERE to view actual video from his original experiment. (8 minutes)
• Would it work today? 2009 retest of the Milgram Experiment (5 min)
• 70% obey up to 150-volt point
• Women obeyed at rates similar to men

​

​

EXPLANATIONS FOR �MILGRAM’S RESULTS

• Abnormal group of subjects?
• Numerous replications with variety of groups shows no support
• Milgram’s study has been repeated many times in the United States and other countries with identical results
• People in general are sadistic?
• videotapes of Milgram’s subjects show extreme distress & not enjoying the experience

EXPLANATIONS FOR �MILGRAM’S RESULTS

• A previously well-established framework to obey
• The situation, or context, in which the obedience occurred (Authority of Yale and value of science)
• New situation and no role model of how to behave or defy the orders
• The gradual, repetitive escalation of the task
• Experimenter self-assurance and acceptance of responsibility
• The physical and psychological separation from the learner

FOLLOW-UP STUDIES TO MILGRAM

CONDITIONS THAT DECREASE THE LIKELIHOOD OF DESTRUCTIVE OBEDIENCE

• Willingness to obey diminishes sharply when:
• buffers that separate the teacher from the learner are lessened or removed.
• experimenter left the room and spoke to the subject over the telephone rather than in person.
• teachers were allowed to act as their own authority and freely choose the shock level,
• 95 percent did not venture beyond 150 volts—the first point at which the learner protested
• People were more likely to defy an authority when they saw others do so

WERE MILGRAM’S OBEDIENCE EXPERIMENTS ETHICAL?

• Attacked for the emotional stress, tension, and loss of dignity experienced by the subjects
• Although 84% later said they were glad to have participated and fewer than 2% said they were sorry, there are still ethical issues
• Follow-ups of Milgram’s subjects indicate that a large majority were glad to have taken part in the experiment and had no signs of harm or traumatic reaction

​

• Milgram suggested that what was disturbing to people were not so much his methods but his results

DOES THIS APPLY TO TODAY?

ASCH, MILGRAM, AND THE REAL WORLD �

• Being at odds with the majority or with authority figures is very uncomfortable for most people
• Enough so that our judgment and perceptions can be distorted and we may act in ways that violate our conscience
• Each of us does have the capacity to resist group or authority pressure but…

Will we do so?

ABU GHRAIB PRISON:�“I WAS JUST FOLLOWING ORDERS.”