Stanley Milgram

Stanley Milgram

In the early 1960s Stanley Milgram began an experiment that would change the way that people viewed obedience to authority. When most people are asked if they would harm a person if ordered to by an authority they respond with a strong no. The experiment done by Milgram set to answer this question in order to better understand how authority and influence the obedience of those under command. This paper is going to look at the Milgram research and experiment on obedience taking a look at the situational variables that make obedience to authority more likely. The paper is going to present a summary of the study, how it was conducted, an explanation of the results, an explanation of the concept of situationism as it applies to the study, and answer some questions such as if the results would differ given different cultures or ethnic groups used as participants in the study. 

Summary of Study

In the early 1960s Milgram after hearing about the WWII trial of Adolph Eichmann who testified that he was just following orders when he helped to kill millions of Jews, became interested in the idea of following orders of authority (Elms, 2009). Milgram wanted to see how far people would go if ordered by an authority figure and designed an experiment in order to do that. Milgram recruited 40 men through newspaper ads and offered to pay them in exchange for their participation. Milgram’s experiment involved the participants being placed in the role of a teacher who asked questions of a student in another room that they couldn’t see; if the student got the question wrong the teacher was to give the student a shock of varying degrees ranging from 30 volts and increase 15 volts each time the student got a question wrong (Elms, 2009).

In the experiment the participant believed they were delivering a shock to a real person, but in reality the student was part of the experiment and only pretending to be shocked. As the teacher began delivering shocks for wrong answers the student would begin to please to stop. As the teacher reached 300 volts the student would bang on the wall, demand to be released, and would begin to refuse to answer questions (Elms, 2009). At this point teachers would be instructed that silence was to be treated as an incorrect response and to shock the student again; the teacher would receive a series of commands to keep them going in the experiment.

Results and Situationism

After the experiment was completed Milgram surveyed a group of Yale students to find out the thoughts people would have on how far individuals would go to obey authority.  The level of the shock that participants in the experiment were willing to give to students was what was used in order to measure obedience.  The surveyed students predicted that only three percent of the participants would have delivered the maximum shock that was allowed in the study, listed only as XXX.  According to Milgram’s results however, 65% of the teachers in the study delivered the maximum shock to students (Milgram, 1973). The results showed that even though participants may have been distraught, in an agitated state, or angry at having to deliver shocks to individuals they believed they were hurting the participants continued on obeying the orders that were given to them.

The concept of situationism is basically a theory that the behavior of humans is determined by the surroundings circumstances of individuals rather than by personal qualities of the person (Fiske, 2010). In the experiment conducted Milgram concluded that there were a number of situational factors which could account for the higher levels of obedience in individuals.  For instance, having the authority figure be physically present increased compliance to obey, having the experiment sponsored by a trusted academic institution like Yale led participants to think it must be safe, the selection to the teacher or student position seemed random, participants assumed the experimenter was a competent expert, and finally the shocks delivered were painful but not dangerous to the student (Milgram, 1973).

Conducting similar studies in which a rebellious peer was present showed that obedience levels were dramatically reduced and individuals refused orders to continue shocking students or to deliver a maximum shock to the student.  In this Milgram (1973), found that situational circumstances greatly affected people’s behaviors in the experiment and he concluded that “when the destructive effects of their work become patently clear, and individuals are asked to carry out actions incompatible with fundamental standards of morality, relatively few people have the resources needed to resist authority" (p. 77). The results of the experiment as well as the further experiments that were conducted show that there is great influence on situational circumstances.  These situation circumstances impact a person’s behavior causing them to act out of character in response to an authority figure and make cause the individuals to become agents of a destructive process despite not wanting to be.

Additional Questions

In whether or not the study results would have been different if the participants were of a different culture, ethnic, or gender group the author believes that the results probably would have been the same.  If Milgram had used women instead of men he may have seen an increase in discomfort from individuals as the shocks increased and students protested more.  However, the results of the individual continuing the shocks or being influenced by the presence of a rebellious peer would most likely remain unchanged.  This would also most likely be the same given different cultures or ethnic groups.

For the question of if the results of the study are important and relevant to contemporary society the results are.  Jerry Burger, a psychology at Santa Clara University, recreated the experiment in order to determine if the results would be the same as they were in the original experiment.  Burger (2009), concluded that in the new experiment individuals obeyed at the same rate as they had nearly 40 years prior in the original experiment.  The results of the study are important in both cases as it shows the impact of the circumstances on how people behave and obey authority figures.  It applies to today’s society because as Milgram stated though individuals may not agree with the course of actions being taken they are ill equipped to resist authority and will instead obey it.

Conclusion

In the early 1960s Stanley Milgram began an experiment that would change the way that people viewed obedience to authority. The experiment done by Milgram set to better understand how authority and influence the obedience of those under command. Milgram wanted to see how far people would go if ordered by an authority figure and designed an experiment in order to do that. The results of the study showed that even though participants may have been distraught, in an agitated state, or angry at having to deliver shocks to individuals they believed they were hurting the participants continued on obeying the orders that were given to them. In the experiment conducted Milgram concluded that there were a number of situational factors which could account for the higher levels of obedience in individuals.  These situation circumstances impact a person’s behavior causing them to act out of character in response to an authority figure and make cause the individuals to become agents of a destructive process despite not wanting to be. The results of the study are important in both cases as it shows the impact of the circumstances on how people behave and obey authority figures.  It applies to today’s society because as Milgram stated though individuals may not agree with the course of actions being taken they are ill equipped to resist authority and will instead obey it.

References

Elms, A. (2009). Obedience Lite. American Psychologist 64(1), 32-36.

Fiske, S. T. (2010). Social beings: Core motives in social psychology (2nd ed.). Danvers, MA: Wiley.

Milgram, S. (1973). The perils of obedience. Harper’s Magazine, 62-77.

Zimbardo Research

Zimbardo Research

Introduction

Philip Zimbardo is a professor and a psychologist. He is in charge as leader to the researchers or scientists in the Stanford Prison Experiment. Stanford Prison Experiment was a research that recognized the psychological influences of persons, engaging upright individuals in a wicked place. The worth of the Stanford Prison Experiment can be associated to social psychology. Social psychology is the systematic endeavor to clarify how the beliefs, moods, and manners of persons are affected by the concrete, imaginary, or indirect attendance of other people (Fiske, 2010). The research is applicable in relative to modern world matters. The importance of the researhc is also correlated to humankind, in a totality. Concerns were shaped due to the study, but there are present defenses in place to lessen the probability of ethical worries to exist in the research studies.

Relation to Social Psychology

The end of social psychology is to describe how point of view, outlooks, and conducts of beings can be impacted by other persons. As said by Fiske (2010), social influence does not simply influence trivial behavior. It can produce to widely held view over one’s individual conclusion (Fiske, 2010). The research of the Stanford Prison Experiment connects to social psychology in a vast way. The experiment indicates how persons can be impacted by other people when they are put in a particular condition. In the research, persons were designated as convicts or guards in the prison. The inmates had no control and guards had every authority. Some of the detainees became emotive and astounded by the experimentation because of how the prison guards treat them. The other prisoners became senselessly submissive. Prison guards became powerful and abusive to the power provided by the researchers. They were impacted by the activities of convicts, becoming firmer and more governing, as seen on their performance and position. Social psychology based on Stanford Prison Experiment demonstrates how individuals change, due to others, to suit in or adjust to the present events.

Relevance in Relation to Contemporary World Issues

The research is significant in relative to current world problems because the deeds really exist in the society and in prison. Spoken abuse, abuse of authority, and compulsive thinking of detainees happen often in prisons worldwide. Persons are psychology affected by their respective positions of prison guard and convicts. Frequently, authority obtains power and seems the necessity to be abusive on the power, governing other persons. Right inclines persons to step outside their power to obey the rules, presented by them or other individuals with higher power. Persons are apt to to follow to particular deeds and make changes on how they reflect because of the persons who are powerful than them.

Relation to Humanity

The research is appreciated in relative to civilization since each person ponders and acts in ways particular in a diversity of settings. Each one is unique. If placed under pressure and in unacquainted surroundings or circumstances, persons will transform and attempt to adjust to the incidences. People like fair treatment. Numerous persons wish to be powerful, while the others never care obeying authority out of being respectful. Persons will sort out what is desirable to endure.

Problems and Ethical Concerns

Troubles and moral distresses which the study formed contain informed agreement, provoking fierceness, and safety concerns. The persons did not know about the violent treatment they were to show. Persons were physically and psychologically maltreated in the procedures of the research. Forcefulness was also encouraged. The prison guards were allowed to treat the prisoners however they desired to, which is a big issue. The behavior of the prison guards was altered, due to their high power, and the prisoners, who were volunteers, were physically and mentally impacted. They were not totally protected and were uninformed of what was happening.

Current Safeguards

 Existing precautions in order to lessen the possibility of ethical distresses are informed agreement, showing respect of person’s varieties, and credentials of all investigation studies. Communicated consensus allows every person to know the procedures of the research studies before being part of it. It gives them the chance to think whether to participate on the study or not before they were provided with details. Being respectful on the person’s choice let them decide to join or not in a study. The documentation gives information regarding the study to ensure the absence of any kind of cultural concerns and clarify all the procedures as part of the study.

           

Conclusion

The Stanford Prison Experiment was considered as a research study that recognized the psychological influences of persons, assigning good individuals in an evil dwelling. Such study of Stanford Prison Experiment connects to social psychology in a great way. Social psychology, in the situation of the research, indicated that convicts are impacted by jail guards and vice versa. Some detainees became sensitive, while the others were thoughtlessly submissive. The custodial guards enjoyed power and mistreated the power knowing that they were entrusted of the convicts. The research study is significant in relative to present-day world problems because the deeds are usual in jails and society. The study has been treasured in relative to civilization because all human beings reflect and acts particular ways in a diversity of settings. Complications and moral anxieties which the study formed involve informed consensus, provocative fierceness, and security matters. Recent safety measures in place to decrease the probability of ethical distresses are communicated consensus, giving respect to the person’s decisions, and a documentation of all studies.

References

Fiske, S.T. (2010). Social beings: Core motives in social psychology (2nd ed.). Danvers, MA:

Wiley.

Social Psychology and Multicultural Psychology

Social Psychology and Multicultural Psychology

Introduction

            The field of social insight, impact, and communication is referred as Social psychology. Its definition is according to the influences. In this field, varied main researched strategies that are employed. A viewpoint that shows appreciation on the cultural diversity in the community and urges the individuals to acquire learning from the influences of the diverse cultural backgrounds (Citizen Warrior, 2008) is multiculturalism.

           

Multiculturalism is the study on the behavior of persons with varied backgrounds. It has a connection wit Social psychology. But these two can be parted into two separate fields.

Define social psychology

            Social psychology pays attention on how persons can influence others. It is a methodical effort to make explanations on how the emotions, views, and attitudes of persons are affected or influenced by the abstract, real, or indirect existence of other persons (Fiske, 2010). Persons can influence one another. It is said by Fiske (2010) that social influence not just influences minor behavior. It is able to influence common view with just one personal decision or judgment (Fiske, 2010). People may change their ideas or opinions because they like to have the same view with those persons surrounding them. Through observations and imitations on what have been seen, individuals can learn.

Primary Research Strategies in Social Psychology

The different main research strategies that are employed in the social psychology are random sampling, descriptive research, experimental research, and correlational research. The purpose of descriptive research is to determine the features of the people. The descriptive research aims to determine a certain variable at a period, identify the variable’s average level quantity that is provided in a particular population (Fiske, 2010). It gives the forecasted value of a particular value in a specified population. There is a random selection of sampling. Survey is one example for this that is utilized to collect data about a particular population by giving a sequence of questions. The persons’ sample is collected as a representation on the particular population.

Random sampling is referred as one that is composed of persons who have the same opportunity to be selected. A real random sample demands that each population member has the same chance as a sample (Fiske, 2010). The good thing about random sample is its efficacy and reliability in cost as it tries to predict the whole population (Fiske, 2010). Conducting a medical study to the persons having high blood pressure is an instance of random sampling. The persons involved in the sample are those who aged 50 and were randomly selected.

Correlational research reveals the implied contrast prowling after descriptive research. It identifies the variable that is compared to another one (Fiske, 2010). It determines the variable’s changes in connection with the one it is compare to. Correlation has three types. The positive correlation is that the two variables both decrease or increase together. But if one variable is greater compared to the other, it is negative correlation. Lastly, it is zero correlation if a person can distinguish the value of one of the variables but not on the other. Studying the relationship or correlation between the lung cancer and smoking is an instance of correlational research. As one smokes, there is a greater chance for that person to be diagnosed with the disease.

       

            Experimental research is a study with dependent variable and independent variable. Independent variable is one that can be influenced by the one conducting the study. For an instance, some partakers may take a particular level and the others may take a different level. To be exact more, an instance, which has been stated in the analysis, is the watching of a fierce or nonaggressive movie. The movies can be altered and supervised. Dependent variable is one that is assessed by the one conducting the experiment and it hinges on to the independent variable (Fiske, 2010).

Definition of Multicultural Psychology

Multicultural psychology concentrates on cognition and behavior, in association to cultures. Multicultural psychology is the investigation of the impacts of diverse culture. Multiculturalism is the study of human behavior, in different situations of a range of backgrounds where individuals meet one another (Fiske, 2010). 

Social and Multicultural Psychology

Multicultural and social are connected because the two can recognize the impacts on thoughts and behavior. Both are disconnected into two separate grounds since multicultural psychology concentrates on the cultural influences, while social psychology concentrates on how persons have an influence on one another. Culture can influence how persons act, ponder, and feel. Culture can have an influence on the circumstances nearby persons and their behavioral manner or interrelate with or nearby other individuals. Furthermore, culture can affect how the things are understood. Each person can be spaced out of a culture, which leads the person to be in diverse settings and have dissimilar parts. This must be valued and recognized since it can determine the result of social life and behavior.

Conclusion

A study on the social impact, perception, and relations is called as Social psychology. It concentrates on how persons have the capability to affect other individuals. Primary research strategies utilized in this field are random sampling, descriptive research, experimental research, and correlational research. Descriptive research is utilized to recognize the individualities of a populace. Random sampling is a model that is consists of persons who are all have the chance of being selected. Correlational research emphasizes on a certain variable, in contrast or connection to the other variable. Experimental research includes a dependent and independent variable. Multicultural psychology is the analysis of the impacts of diverse cultures on conduct and how persons reflect. Multicultural and social are linked since both can categorize the impacts on actions and judgments. Both are disjointed into two different fields since multicultural psychology concentrates on the impacts of cultures, while social psychology concentrates on how persons can influence others.

References

Citizen Warrior. (2008). Definition of Multiculturalism.

Retrieved on from http://www.citizenwarrior.com/2008/09/definition-of-multiculturalism.html

Fiske, S.T. (2010). Social beings: Core motives in social psychology (2nd ed.). Danvers, MA:

Wiley.