Moderate Concept: Milgram Shock Experiment

Author: Andres Rodriguez Espinosa

ED 304: Ed Psych & Human Development

Disclosure: No AI programs were used in the making of this section

"I observed 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. He constantly pulled on his earlobe and twisted his hands. 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 of the experimenter, and obeyed to the end."

-Stanley Milgram on the observed effects of obedience.

The Behavioral Study of Obedience by Stanley Milgram

Stanley Milgram, a Yale University psychologist, conducted one of his most famous studies from the 60s. His study is sometimes referred to as "Milgram's Shock Experiment." In this experiment, Milgram focused on the understanding of obedience as being a structure of social life through authority. Milgram's interest in the topic of obedience stemmed from his understanding of World War II and the obedience of the Nazi Reich towards Hitler's Jewish extermination plan. As referenced in Milgram's study, the death quota of the Jewish population "could only be carried out on a massive scale if a very large number of persons obeyed" (1963). Therefore, Milgram viewed obedience from the perspective that obedience could enable acts of charity and kindess, or enable destructive actions.

Milgram controlled experiment was presented to his 40 male participants as a learning investigation. Two members of Milgram's team partook in the experiment but were mostly actors portraying a role as part of Milgram's plan. The participants drew straws so that three roles could be established: the learner, the teacher, and the experimenter. The learner and the experimenter were fixed roles and played by actors who were aware of Milgram's intentions. Once roles were established, the experimenter and the teacher went into one room where the shock machine was while the learner went into a room to be strapped into a chair that could emit electric shocks.

Now that the teacher and experimenter were in their places, the teacher was instructed by the experimenter to test the learner by saying a list of word pairs and having the learner repeat them. For every incorrect answer, the teacher must shock the learner as a form of punishment. The voltages went from 15 to 450. 15 Volts is considered to be a slight shock while 450 is an almost deadly amount. Milgram's learner intentionally answered incorrectly, which meant that the participant had to shock the learner. The shocks were slight at first, but they increased as more incorrect answers were given. The experimenter had four sentences that he would use to ensure that the participant continued to go along with shocking the learner. This continued until the learner stopped answering or Milgram concluded that the experiment was over.

The Ethical Problems and Implications of Milgram's study

Based on his first trial run, 65% of participants reached the 450-volt shock while the rest of the participants reached 300 volts. With such a high rate, headlines were made about obedience and how authority can create such destructive decisions. However, the entire study was created to be deceptive. Participants were not aware of the shocking procedure and they were not aware that the shocks were simulated. The learner was a 47 year old accountant who did not suffer any harm during the experiment. In some variations, the learner would go silent as to create distress and stimulate death. In the video below you can see an example of how the experiment was conducted.

Furthermore, the experimenter, a 31-year-old biology high school teacher had four sentences that were scripted in the event that the participant refused to participate:

1. "Please continue."
2. "The experiment requires you to continue."
3. "It is absolutely essential that you continue."
4. "You have no other choice but to continue."

These kinds of phrases would not be allowed in modern studies. In a research setting, the participant has the choice to discontinue the study with no questions asked. In the case of Milgram's study, they were forced to stay. However, in, further studies there were participants who fought the authority. This leads us to the implications and limitations of his first study.

His participants were all male, which meant that there was no investigation into female reaction to authority. The location of the study was at Yale University inside of a lab which created a sense of officiality and superiority for the participants. This was furthered the the $4.50 that were paid to the participants who showed up. These factors could've impacted the study because this was enough to convince any ordinary person to follow instructions even if it meant killing the learner.

However, Milgram conducted 18 variations of his study with 636 participants in which he would change the setting, but not the procedure. When Milgram changed the location from Yale to a run down office, obedience dropped to 47.5% (Mcleod, 2023). In one variation, Milgram allowed the participant to instruct an assistant (actor as well) to do the electric shocks, obedience increased to 92.5%. When the participant was forced to move the hands of the learner onto a shock plate, obedience dropped to 30% when they reached 150 volts. One variation removed the experimenter and this dropped obedience down to 20.5%. Participants would give smaller shocks or avoid the higher voltage shocks which furthered the idea that authority can create obedience.

Milgram's Experiment in a Modern Psychological Context

As mentioned earlier, this experiment would be difficult to replicate exactly as it used to be when Milgram first ran his study. However, we can learn multiple points in the context of research. For one, don't take information for face value. The original 65% was one of the bigger numbers that were presented to the public, but what wasn't considered were the limitations. This was done to only men and at an Ivy League school. Furthermore, it is important to treat participants as run-down. 

Should you have the opportunity to conduct a research study in the future, it's crucial that your participants are well-informed about the study, treated fairly, and allowed to discontinue the study at any point without any questions. It's also important to note what kind of variables are a part of the study. From the location to even subtle things such as room temperature. As important as Milgram's study is, we can learn about creating improved studies with what he missed out on.

Practize Quiz

What was Milgram studying?

Learning

Obedience and Authority

Electric Pain

Electroshock Therapy

Milgram's first run yielded a 65% obedience rate. When Milgram changed the location from Yale to a run-down office, what was the obedience rate?

47.5%

30%

50%

20.75%

What was one of the sentences used by the experimenter to enforce a practice of the study on the participant?

"Do not stop the shocks"

"Please do not stop the experiment"

"These electric shocks won't kill the learner"

"You have no other choice but to continue"

Keyword:

• Authority - "the capacity to influence others. Formal authority enables an individual to exert influence as a result of either high, legally recognized office (legitimate authority) or high rank in a long-established but not legally codified hierarchy (traditional authority). Informal authority is based on the individual having either attributes that facilitate the achievement of a group’s goals (rational or expert authority) or an attractive and authoritative personality serving to enhance his or her credibility (charismatic authority)."
• Controlled Experiment - "This is when a hypothesis is scientifically tested. In a controlled experiment, an independent variable (the cause) is systematically manipulated, and the dependent variable (the effect) is measured; any extraneous variables are controlled."
• Obedience - "behavior in compliance with a direct command, often one issued by a person in a position of authority. Examples include a child who cleans his or her room when told to do so by a parent and a soldier who follows the orders of a superior officer. Obedience has the potential to be highly destructive and ethically questionable."

_{Definitions used were taken from the APA Dictionary of Psychology and Psychology Today}

References:

Department of Psychology. (n.d.). Stanley Milgram. https://psychology.fas.harvard.edu/people/stanley-milgram

Mcleod, S. (2023, June 16). Stanley Milgram Shock Experiment: Summary, results, & ethics. Simply Psychology. https://www.simplypsychology.org/milgram.html

Milgram, S. (1963). Behavioral study of obedience. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 67, 371-378.