The Milgram Experiment

The Milgram experiment, conducted by Stanley Milgram at Yale University in the early 1960s, is a landmark study in social psychology. It explored the power of obedience to authority and how it can lead people to commit acts that conflict with their conscience.

1) The Experiment

Participants: Men recruited through newspaper ads believed they were taking part in a learning and memory experiment.

2) Procedure

    * Participants were randomly assigned roles: "teacher" or "learner" (actually an actor).

    * The "teacher" administered electric shocks (fake) to the "learner" for wrong answers.

    * The experimenter, a figure of authority, instructed the teacher to continue increasing the shock intensity with each mistake.

* **Results:** Shockingly, a high percentage of participants (around 65%) obeyed instructions and delivered shocks up to the maximum level, despite the learner's protests.

3) Stanley Milgram

A Yale psychologist who designed the experiment to understand obedience in the context of the Holocaust and other atrocities. 

A prestigious Ivy League institution where the experiment took place. The university's reputation added to the perceived legitimacy of the experiment for the participants.

4) Contestants vs. Participants

The terms "contestants" and "participants" are not interchangeable here. The experiment did not involve competition; participants were volunteers.

5) Real vs. Fake

The experiment was real. The shocks were not real, but the participants believed they were. The focus was on their psychological response to a seemingly genuine situation.

6) Conflicting with Personal Conscience

The participants expressed discomfort and anxiety throughout the experiment.  Continuing despite these feelings highlights the conflict between their conscience and the pressure to obey the authority figure.

7) Real-Life Examples

The Milgram experiment sheds light on historical events like the Holocaust, where ordinary people followed orders to commit horrific acts. It can also be seen in cases of bullying or hazing, where pressure from authority figures leads to harmful behavior.

8) Variations of the Experiment

Proximity: When the "learner" was closer and their discomfort more apparent, obedience dropped significantly. 

Remote experimenter:  A detached experimenter via phone reduced obedience compared to a physically present one.

Peer pressure: Introducing a "rebellious" participant who refused to continue shocks lessened obedience in others.

9) Why People Obeyed

Gradual escalation: The shock levels increased incrementally, making it easier to justify each step.

Social influence: The experimenter, as an authority figure, wielded power and made disobedience seem difficult.

Desire to complete the task:  Participants felt a commitment to seeing the experiment through.

Diffusion of responsibility: Sharing responsibility with the experimenter lessened the perceived burden of guilt.

10) Ethical Concerns

The experiment raised serious ethical concerns:

Deception:  Participants were misled about the experiment's true purpose.

Psychological distress:  Many participants experienced anxiety and emotional discomfort.

Debriefing: The thoroughness of debriefing to explain the experiment and address any lingering emotional effects has been debated.

11) Overall Conclusion

The Milgram experiment demonstrated the power of situational forces and obedience to authority. It raised significant ethical questions about experimentation and continues to be a subject of debate and analysis in social psychology.