Is it fair to deceive humans in an unethical psychological experiment in order to receive new information? This is a question that I believe needs to be asked when one thinks of the Milgram experiment‚ a psychological study set up in the U.S in 1965. American psychologist Stanley Milgram held an experiment in order to see how severely ordinary human beings could knowingly cause harm to another human. This idea came about when he studied the holocaust in Germany in WWII‚ and then in the Nuremberg
Premium Stanford prison experiment Psychology Milgram experiment
Brad Birnbaum October 30‚ 2012 The Milgram Experiment Sociology 115 The Milgram experiment‚ a study based on a person’s obedience to an authority‚ was a series of social psychology experiments. These experiments measured the willingness of people to obey a person with authority. During the study‚ head figures instructed participants to perform acts that would normally conflict with their personal morality. Milgram’s experiments started shortly after the trial of German Nazi
Premium Psychology Stanford prison experiment Milgram experiment
Stanley Milgram Obedience Experiment One of the most famous studies of obedience in psychology was carried out by Stanley Milgram (1963). Stanley Milgram‚ a psychologist at Yale University‚ conducted an experiment focusing on the conflict between obedience to authority and personal conscience. He examined justifications for acts of genocide offered by those accused at the World War II‚ Nuremberg War Criminal trials. Their defense often was based on "obedience" - that they were just
Free Milgram experiment Stanford prison experiment Stanley Milgram
The Stanford prison experiment was similar to the Milgram experiment because both of the experiments focused on the responses of people when there are underneath authority. Zimbardo was interested in what would happen when you would put good people in an evil place. He also focused on if the situation out of the institution can control your behavior or does your attitude and values will overcome the situation from the negative environment. For Zimbardo negative environment‚ he had created a mock
Premium Stanford prison experiment Milgram experiment
The milgram experiment. The three people involved were: the one running the experiment‚ the subject of the experiment a volunteer‚ and a person pretending to be a volunteer. These three persons fill three distinct roles: the Experimenter an authoritative role‚ the Teacher a role intended to obey the orders of the Experimenter‚ and the Learner the recipient of stimulus from the Teacher. The subject and the actor both drew slips of paper to determine their roles‚ but unknown to the subject‚ both slips
Premium Milgram experiment Asch conformity experiments Stanford prison experiment
learning about the Stanley Milgram experiment‚ I found myself questioning why and how the majority of the subjects that participated in the experiment were willing to inflict apparent pain and injury on an innocent person‚ and found myself curious as to how I would react should I but put in the same situation. I believe that the most significant reason for this disturbing absence of critical thinking and moral responsibility is because the subjects involved in the experiment were blinded by authority
Premium Stanford prison experiment Critical thinking Milgram experiment
The aim of Milgram’s 1963 study was to see how far an ordinary person would go when asked to follow orders from an authority figure‚ even if it meant breaking their ethical code and harming another person. There were number of aspects of Milgram’s procedure. Firstly 40 male participants aged 20-50 were chosen by a volunteer sample as they replied to a local newspaper advert which was asking for people to take part in a study at Yale. The participants were paid $4.50 an hour and were told it was a
Free Psychology Stanford prison experiment Milgram experiment
Imagine yourself being shocked as an act of you incorrectly answering a question. In the Milgram Experiment‚ 40 men were recruited using newspaper ads in order to preform a test that would question human obedience. The question posed was: would they comply with an authority figures commands because they were stressed to‚ or would they comply because they thought it was the noble thing to do? The results clearly show that under authority‚ people will comply with what they are told to do even if they
Premium Stanford prison experiment Milgram experiment Psychology
Obedience to Authority and the obedience experiments that produced Stanley Milgram’s famous book have produced almost equal amounts of surprise‚ curiosity and criticism. The criticism of social psychologist John Darley and playwright Dannie Abse are each representative of the general criticism Milgram has received; Darley focuses on whether the study has any relevance to real world events (such as the Holocaust)‚ and Abse focuses on justification of the experiment‚ i.e. was the study worth doing in spite
Premium Stanford prison experiment Psychology Milgram experiment
Stanley Milgram Milgram‚ Stanley. Behavioral Study of Obedience (1963). Question? Why would people obey a legitimate authority figure even if they were asked to do something that was clearly and morally wrong? Hypothesis Milgram want to test the GADH (German’s Are Different Hypothesis)‚ which was currently being used by historians to explain the systematic destruction of millions of Jews‚ Poles and other’s in the 1930’s and 1940’s. This hypothesis maintains • Hitler could not have
Premium Milgram experiment Shock Stanley Milgram