“I observe a mature and initially poised businessman enter the laboratory smiling and confident. Within 20 minutes he was reduced to a twitching, stuttering wreck who was rapidly approaching a point of nervous collapse… At one point he pushed his fist into his forehead and muttered, “Oh, God! Let’s stop it.” And yet he continued to respond to every word the experimenter and obeyed to the end.” -Stanley Milgram
Roger Hock’s Forty Studies that Changed Psychology features Stanley Milgram’s infamous research on obedience, “the shock experiment” (308-316). This experiment not only incorporates discussions of obedience, but also discussion on ethical research methods. Regardless, the shock experiment revealed how people are capable of carrying out harm to others just because someone told them to do so. In the study, subjects thought that they were participating in an experiment about the effects of punishment on learning, and were then told to deliver increasing levels of shock every time a student gave the wrong answer (Hock 309-310). However, no students received shocks and the subjects did not know this. The results were unbelievable: every subject administered at least one shock and two-thirds gave all the levels of shock (Hock 311). Milgram’s study showed that obedience depends on the situation instead of an individual’s personality, and the nature of the relationship to authority influences someone’s obedience.
I chose this study because it was a breakthrough experiment in psychology that showed unbelievable results. I remember seeing footage of this experiment in high school, and it was interesting to see obedience in a different light. Also, it was interesting to see that there really were not any ethical guidelines to follow during that time, but at the same time it gave great insight into obedience. Obviously we cannot just get rid of ethical guidelines in psychology, but without them, we get results unlike any other.
Once concept illustrated in Milgram’s experiment is privilege. According to Peggy McIntosh, “the idea that one group has something of value that is denied to others simply because of the groups they belong to, rather than because of anything they’ve done or failed to do” (Johnson 35). In the experiment, the teacher (Milgram) had privilege over the subjects because he was an authority figure. His position as an intelligent university professor studying social psychology gave him authority over the subjects. The subjects probably thought that they should listen to Milgram because he knew more than they did. Milgram possessed the value of knowledge and the subjects did not, and therefore he was able to control them. The subjects saw Milgram as a person with this privilege because they classified him into a group that had the privilege. Their only reaction was to follow his orders even if they knew that they were wrong.
Another concept illustrated in Milgram’s experiment is the path of least resistance. The path of least resistance the most appealing choice one could make as compared to all the other choices we have (Johnson 80). We choose this path because it prevents us from receiving unknown reactions from other people. In this experiment, the path of least resistance for the subjects was to continuously obey Milgram’s orders. They did not do anything else because they were afraid of what Milgram’s response would be. Even though the subjects knew that shocking people was wrong, they still continued to do it because it was the favorable choice to make. They probably thought that since this is an experiment disobeying Milgram would ruin the results. In a way this is a form of denial. The subjects are “getting off the hook” by denying that hurting the students existed. Denial is the easiest way to get off the hook (Johnson 108). Denying the fact that they were hurting others, supported their continuation of the experiment.
After seeing footage of this experiment I always said that I would never give such intense shocks to another person. I know that it is inhumane and completely wrong to do it. But then again, I am not in that position, so I do not really know what I would do. Regardless, this experiment shows just how much of an influence an authority figure can have, even if their orders are wrong. Everyday we see this type of situation. For example, friends giving in to peer pressure even though they know that what they are about to do is wrong. I think that obedience is not something that we think about consciously, so we get ourselves in really bad situations sometimes.
Hock, Roger. Forty Studies that Changed Psychology. Upper Saddle River: Pearson Prentice Hall, 2005.
Johnson, Allan G. Privilege, Power, and Difference. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2006.
No comments:
Post a Comment