Stanley Milgram's Obedience Study Answers

A classic experiment on the natural obedience of individuals was designed and tested by a Yale psychologist, Stanley Milgram. The test forced participants to either go against their morals or violate authority. For the experiment, two people would come into the lab after being told they were testing memory loss, though only one of them was actually being tested. The unaware individual, called the “teacher” would sit in a separate room, administering memory related questions. If the individual in the other room, the “learner,” gave a wrong answer, the teacher would administer a shock in a series of increasingly painful shocks correlating with the more answers given incorrectly. Milgram set up a recorder

Stanley Milgram, established a new course of study in the psychology of obedience. The purpose of his experiment was to have an idea of to see how people react the autocritical standard; during his experiment, he recorded how people will behave when given a source of power. Milgram gained this idea after the World War II. He believed that some people had the ability to essentially block out human thoughts of morals, ethics, and sympathetics when assigned to a job. The core issue that Milgram faced was finding a way to create a situation to test his theory; because behavior is such a complicated aspect of psychology to test, Milgram had to properly execute the experiment without physical harm from one person to another.

In her article, “Review of Stanley Milgram’s Experiments on Obedience”, psychologist Diana Baumrind criticizes Stanley Milgram’s experiments on obedience to authority, stating that not only were Milgram’s experiments unethical but so was the scientist himself, claiming that he did not take appropriate measures to properly ensure his subject’s wellbeing post-experiment and therefore, experiments such as these should not be repeated. Baumrind does address an important point in her review and that is the responsibility of psychologists to ensure that their subjects are treated fairly and ethically but this is overshadowed by the fact that Baumrind’s argument is one rooted in pathos with little evidence to support her claims while being

In “The Stanford Prison Experiment” Philip G. Zimbardo discusses an experiment he conducted, which consisted of college students portraying guards and prisoners in a simulated prison. Shortly after the experiment began, it was stopped, due to the mistreatment of the prisoners and the overall psychological abuse inflicted on them by the prison guards (Zimbardo 116). In “The Perils of Obedience” Stanley Milgram writes about a controversial experiment in which he requests volunteers to assist him in shocking participants who answer incorrectly to certain questions on the opposite side of a wall. The shock that the volunteers believe they are administering could cause great harm or even be deadly to the participants. After Milgram conducts

Stanley Milgram wanted to research how far individuals would go when harming another individual just to obey/follow instructions. Two participants were chosen and one was the learner and the other was the teacher. The learner was a confederate. The learner/confederate was taken to a separate room and hooked up to an electrode machine. The teacher was placed in another room with the researcher, and the teacher would read lists and every time the learner repeated the list back incorrectly, the learner would receive a shock. The learner/confederate gave wrong answers, and the level of the shocks increased each time. As the shocks appeared to increase, the learner would object. The aim was to see if the teacher would find the objections

“Rules are for the obedience of fools and the guidance of wise men” Harry Day USAF. That’s a great way to look at obedience as guidance and not as a complete absolute, for when people do things without thought people will get hurt. The Milgram experiment is a showcase of what people will do if they do not have to take personal responsibility. Just because someone with all the trappings of authority and power tell us to do something does not mean what we are doing is right. The Milgram experiment showed psychologist that is wrong to subjugate test subjects without prior knowledge or consent. Furthermore, we now know that people are affected in both the short and long term from deception of testing, and some will never get over the fact that they were lied to.

In the 1960 's, Stanley Milgram, a Yale professor, conducted an experiment that sparked intense controversy throughout the nation. Milgram attempted to pinpoint evil in its rawest form: this was achieved by placing an ordinary person, called the "teacher", in a situation in which an instructor pressured the subject to shock another person, called the learner. Despite hearing the progressively agonizing screams of the learner, the teacher continued to comply with the directives given by the instructor, thereby selecting obedience over morality. While this experiment was revered and praised by many scientists and psychologists, it was also ridiculed by others. One psychologist that holds the Milgram experiment in extreme contempt is Diana Baumrind, a leading parenting phycologist. She expressed in her article, Review of Stanley Milgram 's Experiments on Obedience, that the experiment was administered by a detached and calculating man whom of which took pleasure in emotionally damaging his subjects. She provides the reader with an emotional perspective in regards to the Milgram experiments. Additionally, critical psychologist Ian Parker describes in his article, Obedience, not only the inhumanity of the experiment, but also the lack of scientific evidence that Milgram uses to support his experiment; in addition, Parker cites multiple sources that support his claims against this incredible experiment. His critique also analytically depicts the repercussions Milgram faced

In the video , Psychologist Milgram experimented on human behavior and their obedience to authority. Showing examples of regular, everyday civilians,volunteering to take an experiment on whether they would get questions right or wrong. With this type of experiment comes consequences where they would be shocked by a "shock generator" which elevates in voltage the more answers that are answered wrong,the higher the voltage goes. In the experiment Milgram wanted to prove that humans will suffer pain behind their belief of the level of authority that an individual upholds. Knowing each question that they may answer could possibly become wrong,the consciously continue in the state of conflict of whether they should proceed on with the experiment or stop. Also, not only does the volunteers continue to take on the abuse of this experiment but their was some Psychologist that continued with the experiment,even when it became dangerous. One man in the video expressed that he has a heart condition,yet and stillcontinued to go on with the experiment and the Psycholist agreed,without any hesitations for health of this older male gentleman.

Title: Drawing on Milgram's classic laboratory research on obedience Examine and Asses the relevance of laboratory based research to real life. Please consider the suggestion below.

Stanley Milgram, a psychologist at Yale University, tested destructive obedience by conducting a very famous experiment. Forty males between the ages of twenty and fifty were asked to participate in a study of memory and learning. The participated in the experiment were divded into two groups, the teachers and the learner, the role of the teachers were to administer electric shocks to the learners. The participants of the experiment were not awear of the really reasons the study is being done. Also the teachers unaware that the learner wasn’t getting shocked, a recored scream played each time the teacher pressed the botten for the learner to get shocked. The teachers in the experiment were watched to see how many times they would shock the

Stanley MIlgram is a Yale University social psychologist who wrote “Behavioral Study of Obedience”, an article which granted him many awards and is now considered a landmark. In this piece, he evaluates the extent to which a participant is willing to conform to an authority figure who commands him to execute acts that conflict with his moral beliefs. Milgram discovers that the majority of participants do obey to authority. In this research, the subjects are misled because they are part of a learning experience that is not about what they are told. This experiment was appropriate despite this. Throughout the process, subjects are exposed to various signs that show them

In Milgram’s Obedience Study (1963) men had to send what they thought was an electric shock to what they think is a man with a heart condition. 80% obeyed, and 65% continued to increase the voltage to full capacity. You can see from the video, that these men truly believe they are sending the shocks, due to their shaking heads, hesitations and disagreements with the man on duty.

For this week’s forum I decided to choose the subject on Stanley Milgram and his social experiments at Yale University. Stanley Milgram experimented with Obedience to Authority. Milgram wanted to find out “how far a person would be willing to go if an authority figure encouraged him or her to pursue a task”. Basically asking how long could a person comply with an authoritative figure asking you to do or comply with extreme task.

In the early 1960’s Stanley Milgram (1963) performed an experiment titled Behavioral Study of Obedience to measure compliance levels of test subjects prompted to administer punishment to learners. The experiment had surprising results.

One of the most known study of obedience was conducted by psychologist Stanley Milgram (“Milgram”). This experiment was focusing on the effects of people’s obedience to authority and their own conscious thoughts and beliefs when it came to harming another person (“Milgram”). Milgram advertised for male participants of varying ages and jobs to be in a Yale University study (“Milgram”). The participant was paired with another person who each had to draw straws to see who would be the “teacher” and who would be the “learner” (“Milgram”). However, this draw was fixed that so the teacher would always be the participant and the learner would