Stanley Milgram Obedience Experiments

Question: Discuss about the Stanley Milgram Obedience Experiments. Answer: Introduction: Obedience is stated as one of the basic elements in the structure of social life. Obedience is considered as an important determinant of human behaviour that helps in analysing the psychology of the referred person (Haslam, Loughnan Perry, 2014). In order to analyse the rate of obedience and the inclination of obedience among the people, various experiments have been conducted that would help in analysing the behavioural aspects of humans (Haslam, et al., 2015). In this essay, Milgrams experiment of behavioural obedience has been taken into consideration. The procedure, findings and analysis of the experiment is analysed in this particular essay. The second part of the essay deals with related studies that has been conducted based on the principles of Milgrams experiment. The essay further analyses the scope of future studies related in this field that would help in attaining variations in the field of psychology. Main findings of original study Stanley Milgram has conducted an experiment that helps in analysing the aspect of obedience among 40 men. This experiment has been conducted at Yale University in the year 1963. The participants for this experiment have been selected by inviting volunteers from the research through newspaper advertising for male participants. The participants were paid $4.50 for volunteering in the experiment (Bgue, et al., 2015). Milgram had chosen 40 males among the age of 25-50 years. Occupation was not considered as a barrier for the selection of the experiment. Each person was introduced to a confederate in the experiment. Purposely, the victim was chosen as the teacher in the experiment to be conducted whereas, the confederate was chosen as the learner (Haslam, et al., 2015). The procedure of the experiment was that, the learner in the experiment would be strapped in an electric chair, where the learner would be receiving electrical shocks. The teacher would be asking a list of word pairs given to the learner to learn. Four options would be provided to them. For every wrong answer given to the teacher, the learner would receive a electric shock. Control of the shock would be under the teacher itself, where he would be provided with a range of electric buttons ranging from 15 to 450 volts. The learner purposely provided the teacher with wrong answers, to which the teacher had to give him shocks. When the teacher refused to administer a shock to the learner, the experimenter had given him a series of prods, where he was plainly ordered to continue with the experiment conducted (Miller, 2014). Milgram had conducted such an experiment to show how the people had responded with respect to orders being formulated to them. According to the experiment, the dependent measure in order to analyse the level of obedience n the person is the maximum shock which he administers before refusing to go any further. A subject, who breaks of the experiment in between at any point, is known as defiant in nature. Others who continue to obey is known as the obedient subject (Hollander, 2015). After the conduction of the experiment, it could be concluded that ordinary people are accustomed to follow the orders that are given to them. Obedience to the authority is one of the most important aspects in our life. Our behavioural system in instructed in such a manner where going against the authority is not considered as something that is not appropriate in nature. People tend to obey orders from other people if they recognize their authority as morally right and / or legally based. This response to legitimate authority is learned in a variety of situations, for example in the family, school and workplace. Several experiment based on Milgram experiment were conducted over the years. All the experiments had kept the base of the research and its methodology the same. Yet, some variations were created on the confederate, the gender, or the manner in which the experiment was carried on. Maximum Milgram-type experiments have the ability to show the same results as that had been achieved earlier in the year 1963 (Haslam, Reicher Birney, 2014). Based on a cross-cultural analysis it could be stated that the obedience rate over different countries have most probably been the same. It has been possibly noticed that the results based on the experiments of Milgram experiments resulted into same average obedience scores. The results of United States stated an obedience rate of 60% whereas, that of remote countries stated an obedience rat of 65%. Surprisingly there were countries like Germany, which recorded an obedience rate high up to 85% (Millard, 2014). Hence, it could be easily stated that on conducting a cross country analyse of Milgram type experiments, the obedience rate among the selected people has been rather same, yet, there were exception countries whose rate was too high in comparison to others. This proves that even if the left is too less, there exist presence of some cross country and cultural difference with respect to the behaviour of obedience (Griggs, 2017). The base experiment of Milgram had been conducted by considering only male members as participants. A second experiment in the year 1974 had been conducted by Milgram, which considers the female victims in order to test their obedience rate. The experimenter had found that women had more inclination towards the behaviour of obedience than men. Twelve Milgram type experiments had been conducted which shows the effect on both male and female participants. The variation in the obedience rates was visible from country to country. It could be seen that in United States, women were equivalent to the rate of obedience with respect to males. None of the America found any sex difference by conducting the experiment (Miller, 2014). An experiment conducted in Australia shows that men were more obedience in comparison to women in the country. Furthermore, in countries like India, it had been found that females were less obedient in nature. In sum, totality of the results that had been derived fr om these experiments states that majority of the students found no sex differences between the two genders whereas, a small number of experiments stated female are considered as less obedient to the male participants. Milgram had theorized in his book that obedience of the sort could be found by allowing the subject to enter into a different experimental state, known as the agentic state (Brannigan, 2013). This state is characterized by the subjects shedding responsibility for his or her actions relinquishing it to the authority in charge. He saw this as the process that enables an individual to act destructively, without the usual moral constraints on his or her own behaviour. Conducting such experiments it was noticed that obedient people shed their responsibilities mire that the defiant ones. This was completely in contrast with what had been believed throughout the years. It was assumed that the obedient people would easily agree in accepting responsibilities, yet that was not the case. Future studies in this area The Milgram experiment that was conducted in order to analyse the rate of obedience in the human behaviour was a famous experiment that had been conducted in the 1963. This experiment had been quite successful in analysing their research aims; yet, the experiment had gone against the ethical concerns related to the subjects. Critics of the research work had argued that the participants of the experiment have been subjected to short term stress and long term harm (Ifcher Zarghamee, 2016). Though Milgram had revolted in his defence that not much harm was done to the subjects, yet, it could be easily stated that under the ethical standards of treating the participants, Milgrams experiments was completely out of bound. The unethical issue that has been raised with respect to Milgrams experiment has halted such psychological experiments to be carried out for more than three decades. In order to overcome such unethical issues, various experiments had been conducted based on the same principle yet with some additional safeguards. According to Burger (2014), Jerry Burger had conducted a similar research where he had undertaken various safeguard measures. He used a two screening process in order to avail potential participants and thereby exclude any participants with negative reactions. Secondly, before the processing of the experiment, the participants were told that they could withdraw their names and still receive an amount of $50. Thirdly, a mild shock of 15 volt was administered rather that 45 volt shock that Milgram had given to his participants. Fourthly, he allowed no time to elapse between ending the session and informing participants that the learner had received no shocks. Within a few secon ds of the studys end, the learner entered the room to reassure the participant that he was fine. Fifth, the experimenter who ran the study also was a clinical psychologist who was instructed to end the study immediately if he saw any signs of excessive stress. Santa Clara University institution review board approved these safeguard measures had helped in maintaining the ethical considerations of conducting experiments and it (Erdos, 2013). After conducting such experiments, though the effect was not as crucial as that of Milgrams experiment, yet, it was sufficient in generating the results for analysing the rate of obedience among the chosen group of participants. Various further experiments had been carried out in this manner under the principles of Milgram experiment, which helps in analysing the obedience behaviour in humans. There are some contradicting results with respect to change in time. Independent attribute of the modern age has shown less rate of obedience that that which had been retrieved before. These experiments carried out are quite helpful continuing the principle of the famous Milgram experiment. Future directions Milgram experiment that has been conducted in the year 1963. At that time, people had more inclination of obeying their authorities. They were dependent upon various factors prevailing in the society. These people had lesser facilities of stating their own perception. With regards to such habits, the inclination of the people towards obeying their authorities is quite natural. There has been a gap of 40 years since such an experiment has been conducted. Various Milgram type experiments had been carried out since then; where with the change in laws, there had been some variations to the extent in which such psychological experiments can be conducted (Leonard Hillstrom, 2016). The future scope of such experiment is to analyse the obedience behaviour of the people in this current era. People are considered more independent in todays world, where they do not hesitate in stating their own perceptions. It has been seen that there is lesser gender discrimination prevailing among the countr ies. This would imply that the difference in the obedience rate between male and female would be considerably low (Miller, 2014). Hence, the further scope of such experiments would be to conduct and analyse the obedience behaviour of the people in the present scenario. Milgram experiment is considered as one of the basic experiments that had been conducted in the field of psychology that forms the base of various experiments to be conducted. In this essay the effective results of Milgram experiment has been analysed along with its unethical considerations. To overcome such unethical considerations, further experiments has been conducted by analysing the safeguards in the experiment. With the change in time, there has been a considerable change in the prospects in which obedience rate is varying among the people. Future scope of experiments could be carried out based on the principles of Milgram thereby having the possibility of attaining the future prospects of human behaviour. Reference Bgue, L., Beauvois, J. L., Courbet, D., Oberl, D., Lepage, J., Duke, A. A. (2015). Personality predicts obedience in a Milgram paradigm.Journal of Personality,83(3), 299-306. Brannigan, A. (2013). Stanley Milgrams obedience experiments: A report card 50 years later.Society,50(6), 623-628. Burger, J. M. (2014). Situational features in Milgram's experiment that kept his participants shocking.Journal of Social Issues,70(3), 489-500. Erdos, E. (2013). The Milgram Trap.Theoretical Applied Ethics,2(2), 123-142. Griggs, R. A. (2017). Milgrams Obedience Study: A Contentious Classic Reinterpreted.Teaching of Psychology,44(1), 32-37. Haslam, N., Loughnan, S., Perry, G. (2014). Meta-Milgram: An empirical synthesis of the obedience experiments.PloS one,9(4), e93927. Haslam, S. A., Reicher, S. D., Birney, M. E. (2014). Nothing by mere authority: Evidence that in an experimental analogue of the Milgram paradigm participants are motivated not by orders but by appeals to science.Journal of Social Issues,70(3), 473-488. Haslam, S. A., Reicher, S. D., Millard, K., McDonald, R. (2015). Happy to have been of service: The Yale archive as a window into the engaged followership of participants in Milgram's obedienceexperiments.British Journal of Social Psychology,54(1), 55-83. Hollander, M. M. (2015). The repertoire of resistance: Non?compliance with directives in Milgram's obedienceexperiments.British Journal of Social Psychology,54(3), 425-444. Ifcher, J., Zarghamee, H. (2016). Ethics and Experimental Economics. InPracticing Professional Ethics in Economics and Public Policy(pp. 195-205). Springer Netherlands. Leonard, A. E., Hillstrom, J. E. (2016). Inducing Application of Interdisciplinary Frameworks: Experiences from the Domains of Information Literacy and Responsible Conduct of Research. InInterdisciplinary Pedagogy for STEM(pp. 57-83). Palgrave Macmillan US. Millard, K. (2014). Revisioning obedience: Exploring the role of Milgram's skills as a filmmaker in bringing his shocking narrative to life.Journal of Social Issues,70(3), 439-455. Miller, A. G. (2014). The explanatory value of Milgram's obedience experiments: A contemporary appraisal.Journal of Social Issues,70(3), 558-573.