Asch's Conformity Studies

The participant was not given full disclose about the details of the experiment, making the research untruthful. Freedom was another principle that was violated since the participants’ ability to withdraw from the experiment was highly discouraged. Even though it was possible to withdraw, not much power was given to the participant. Lastly, Milgram was neither altruistic nor giving of dignity to the participant. Participants showed signs of stress and possible psychological damage due to the process of harming another individual, but that did not stop the experiment. Milgram instructed the participants to continue the study until the very end. In order to make this experiment more ethical, Milgram should have set up the experiment in a way that did not give the illusion of causing harm to another human being. Also, participants should have been able to withdraw from the experiment without questioning. Lastly, Milgram should have known to stop the study once he saw the participant showing signs of distress and pain. This is to cause less harm to the participant and promote

Humans often act in ways they know to be incorrect or wrong for their own social benefit, often because we fear being different. One example of this is the Asch Conformity Experiment, where 75% of participants would choose the wrong answer on an obvious question just to not stand out from the crowd. After the experiment, all said they felt self-conscious and feared disapproval from the group. Another example is when those in a social group have preferences or choices differ from the rest of the group, they will often conform to the rest of the group's opinion. Nobody wants to be the only person to dislike a certain food or think a certain way, they fear they will be judged negatively for it. As social creatures, we seek for and strive other

Prompted by this phenomenon, Stanley Milgram investigates this “potent impulse overriding training in ethics, sympathy, and moral conduct.” (Milgram 314) Milgram set up an experiment in which he intended “to test how much pain an ordinary citizen would inflict on another person simply because he was ordered to by an experimental scientist.” (Milgram 314) Thereby, observations could be made of how long a person would continue to inflict pain. “To extricate himself from this plight, the subject must make a clear break with authority.” (Milgram 315) The basic premise of the study being to learn how an ordinary person reacts when put under pressure to cause great physical harm to a stranger through a series of simulated electrical shocks. However, the subjects are under the impression that they were participating in a study of memory and learning. This is where Diana Baumrind takes issue with Milgram’s study. She feels that “by volunteering, the subject agrees implicitly to assume a posture of trust and obedience.” (Baumrind 326) Basically, Baumrind feels that the setting of a fairly innocuous sounding experiment in a safe, controlled environment of a lab causes the subject to have a false sense of safety in the experimenter’s experience. Therefore, the experiments are prone to produce skewed results, as well as potential psychological injury to the subject. Later analysis of

It was surprising how easily someone could just inflict pain on another human being without so much as a second thought. Milgram even states “Subjects in the experiment frequently even said, “If it were up to me, I would not have administered shocks to the learner” (Milgram 702). By stating this I know the participants did have some remorse they wouldn’t want to shock the learner but they do because of the fact they were told to by an authority figure. In life we are always told to listen and respect our elders and teachers and we see them as our authority figure so if they were to give us a command we would compile. What if the command we were given was something we knew was wrong but since it was from someone who has authority it must make it ok. That’s we think and I know working in the nursing field I see it more than I should because of nurses telling me to do things I’m not allowed to do under my certifications. I find it hard to tell them no, just like the participants of this experiment they knew that if they listened the individual would get hurt but that didn’t matter they were doing what they were told to do. The experiments were wrong morally and were extremely cruel and because they were so unnecessary innocent individuals were put in pain for no

During the Holocaust, millions of Jews were murdered. One specific person did not cause these deaths, because there was a division of labor. Adolf Eichmann, a Nazi organizer of these mass murders, never saw the direct effects of the genocide he was orchestrating. After the Holo-caust, Stanley Milgram conducted an experiment to study the levels of obedience to authority; he used his experiment to find where evil resided in people and to discover the cause of the Holo-caust. Some people found his findings useful information, while others thought his experiment was morally unacceptable due to his use of deception. Diana Baumrind, author of “Some Thoughts on the Ethics of Research: After Reading Milgram’s ‘Behavioral Study of Obedi-ence,’” disagrees with Milgram’s use of deception and manipulation in his experiment. Con-trasting Baumrind, Richard Herrnstein, author of “Measuring Evil,” believes deception was nec-essary in order for Milgram’s experiment to be effective. Deception is ultimately needed in the experiment, especially because Milgram’s findings are beneficial information for social science.

Milgram wanted to know if the solders that were involved in the tragic Holocaust willingly were a part of slaughtering more than six million people in the concentration camps. Were the solders psychopaths, or were they just doing as they were told? Werhane also informed that the experiment took place at Yale University in 1960 that consisted of three participants, one was said to be the teacher, the second was the experimenter, and the third was the learner. Although it appeared to the teacher that the roles were assigned by drawing lots, the roles were pre-determined. The teacher was told that the experiment was to help understand the effect of punishment on

Because humans crave attention of others, they live their life and conform to whatever the majority of the people around them says. Asch’s Conformity Experiment, which was when they hired eight actors and one test subject and gave them all a test and told the eight actors to say the wrong answer, they found that the test subject would usually conform to the majority vote even if it was wrong. This showed us that people would usually conform to the majority answer on a test, even if it was wrong. Even in high school, students conform to make themselves look cool and conform to things even if they know it’s wrong. Asch’s experiment and american high schools prove to us that humans don’t want to stand out and we just want to fit in and get attention.

In 1984, after the trial of World War 2 criminal Adolph Eichmann, Stanley Milgram created an experiment where his starting hypothesis was to see if Germans had a character flaw which made them more obedient which correlated to the holocaust. He put an advertisement in the newspaper for volunteers for an educational experiment who would be paid on hour for $4.50. The experiment itself wasn’t real, but the participants didn’t know that it going in. The experiment was once they got into the “laboratory”, they picked from a hat and one would get “teacher” and the other “learner” but it is rigged so the participants will always get “teacher”. Jack William who is the experimenter takes the “learner” into a room to strap them into the shock machine while the “teacher” watches and at this time, the “teacher” is informed of the “learners” heart condition and Jack Williams pushes

The Stanley Milgram Obedience experiment is an experiment to replicate Nazis following Hitler’s orders to kill Jews in World War II. Whereas, in this experiment, forty males were recruited to complete this study; they were told it was a memory and learning experiment. In this experiment, every time the subject (learner) answered incorrectly, the recruited male (teacher) would have to shock them. The results were: all forty subjects (teachers) obeyed up to 300 volts, and twenty-five of the so-called teachers, continued to give shocks up to the maximum level of 450 volts.

Although not every individual is affected by it, the fear of being alone is prevalent throughout the world. Monophobia, or the fear of being alone, can cause a person to conform. Whether it be to a majority, a small group, a single individual, or an idea, conforming is so frequent that it is often performed blindly. A common example of conformity is dress code within a workplace. If somebody sees their coworkers wearing a suit and tie, odds are that they will conform to this standard and dress the same way, in order to not stand out.

Stanley Milgram conducted one of the most controversial psychological experiments of all time: the Milgram Experiment. Milgram was born in a New York hospital to parents that immigrated from Germany. The Holocaust sparked his interest for most of his young life because as he stated, he should have been born into a “German-speaking Jewish community” and “died in a gas chamber.” Milgram soon realized that the only way the “inhumane policies” of the Holocaust could occur, was if a large amount of people “obeyed orders” (Romm, 2015). This influenced the hypothesis of the experiment. How much pain would someone be willing to inflict on another just because an authority figure urged them to do so? The experiment involved a teacher who would ask questions to a concealed learner and a shock system. If the learner answered incorrectly, he would receive a shock. Milgram conducted the experiment many times over the course of 2 years, but the most well-known trial included 65% of participants who were willing to continue until they reached the fatal shock of 450 volts (Romm, 2015). The results of his experiment were so shocking that many people called Milgram’s experiment “unethical.”

After reading “If Hitler asked you” I was astonished to read that the experiment where participants electrocuted an individual was intense. I can’t even imagine being asked to inflict that kind of intense pain to another human. I understand that everyone can state that in the beginning and over time their moral compass may change. Meyer realized that many of his participants were able to inflict even the more severe voltages past 15 volts like 435 and 450. I found it interesting the difference between the Yale students and Bridgeport because Yale students were more obedient. Was it because of how they were raised not to question authority like “The U.S upper-class” stated or was because of their moral compasses? Also, I thought it was interesting

Consistently, the experimenters lied to the subjects about the reasons of the research, the role they will play, and received monetary compensation to perform during the study. The results were astonishing and prove that American people are easily manipulated by authority figures. The most incredible parts was that this study was performed little after the trial of A. Eichmann, the Holocaust’s serial killer, whose defense was that he was only following orders when he ordered the assassination of millions of Jews. At this point, one should infer that certain individuals are prone to violence and they just need any reason to inflict pain on others. Finally, the experiment will be completely different, if it is performed to day considering that researching rules are stricter today. For instance, the participants have to sign an informed consent. However, as sad as it is the results could be the same or more disastrous for the reason mentioned

Social Conformity Hypothesis: Participants will act in a certain way/ change their opinion in order to conform to the majority. Social conformity refers to an individual’s change in behaviour, beliefs or feelings to accommodate to the standards of their peers or to conform to social norms. A study carried out in 1932 by Jenness to test social conformity, consisted of 101 psychology students and was an experimental investigation. Students were asked individually how many jellybeans were in a glass bottle. The participants were divided into groups and asked to find a group estimate through discussion.

The social scientist that I have decided to base my ISU on is Solomon Asch, a psychologist.