Theory of obedience
Another weakness is that is that not all obedience is because of the orders of an authority figure. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 7 2— Unbeknownst to the participant, the person supposedly receiving the shocks was actually in on the experiment and was merely acting out responses to imaginary shocks.
Although using excess power may be successful in the short run, power that is based exclusively on reward and coercion is not likely to produce a positive environment for either the power-holder or the subordinate.
Obedience dropped to What made all those people follow the orders they were given?
Although this research suggests that people may use power when it is available to them, other research has found that this is not equally true for all people—still another case of a person-situation interaction. I set up a simple experiment at Yale University to test how much pain an ordinary citizen would inflict on another person simply because he was ordered to by an experimental scientist.
Milgram obedience study
Implications[ edit ] One of the major assumptions of obedience research is that the effect is caused only by the experimental conditions, and Thomas Blass ' research contests this point, as in some cases participant factors involving personality could potentially influence the results. Although these people did not have much reward or coercive power, they were nevertheless perceived as good and respected citizens of the United States. Wallace was strapped to a chair with electrodes. Prisoners likewise were hostile to and resented their guards. Unbeknownst to the participant, the person supposedly receiving the shocks was actually in on the experiment and was merely acting out responses to imaginary shocks. Although power can be abused by those who have it, having power also creates some positive outcomes for individuals. Let me out of here.
Beyer, J. International Journal of Psychiatry, 6 4 The group is the person's behavioral model.
Theory of obedience
It is assumed that without such an order the person would not have acted in this way. Following the Second World War - and in particular the Holocaust - psychologists set out to investigate the phenomenon of human obedience. Confederate 1 stopped at volts, and confederate 2 stopped at volts. Burger noted that "current standards for the ethical treatment of participants clearly place Milgram's studies out of bounds. The experiments began in July , a year after the trial of Adolf Eichmann in Jerusalem. All of the poll respondents believed that only a very small fraction of teachers the range was from zero to 3 out of , with an average of 1. I set up a simple experiment at Yale University to test how much pain an ordinary citizen would inflict on another person simply because he was ordered to by an experimental scientist. In the Stanford Prison Experiment , college age students were put into a pseudo prison environment in order to study the impacts of "social forces" on participants behavior. In Experiment 17, when two additional teachers refused to comply, only four of 40 participants continued in the experiment. If the teacher asked whether the learner might suffer permanent physical harm, the experimenter replied, "Although the shocks may be painful, there is no permanent tissue damage, so please go on. Surprisingly, Milgram found that 65 percent of participants were willing to deliver the maximum level of shocks on the orders of the experimenter.
In that variation, 37 of 40 continued with the experiment. Participants' comments from the previous study were coded for the number of times they mentioned "personal responsibility and the learner's well being". Fiske, D.
based on 40 review