Stanley Milgram Experiment
Yale University psychologist, Stanley Milgram, conducted an experiment in 1961 focusing on the conflict between obedience to authority and personal conscience. He examined justifications for acts of genocide offered by those accused at the World War II Nuremberg War Criminal trials. Their defense often was based on "obedience" - that they were just following orders from their superiors. Milgram's experiment, which he told his participants was about learning, was to have participants (teacher) question another participant (learner), and when the learner got a question wrong the teacher would shock the learner. For every question wrong, the teacher would increase the amount of volts used in the shock. Of course the experiment was actually about obedience, the learner was an experimenter, and the shock was faked (McLeod). Milgram's was one of the first psychology experiments to use
…show more content…
In the case of Milgram's experiment, if he would have informed his participants that they were being tested on how far they would go when they were ordered to do so, even if it was against their conscience, the participants would never have gone as far as they did and the research would have been fundamentally flawed. There is no accurate way to test human nature if the participants change their behavior based on what is expected of them. "The tendency of people to portray themselves in a more favorable light than their thoughts or actions, is called socially desirable responding (Lalwani)." Socially desirable responding is one of the problems with the use of surveys, and the problem carries over to behavioral studies. If the "teachers" from Milgram's experiment had been told the real purpose of the study, they most likely would have applied far less shock, if they shocked at all because that is what is socially acceptable. No one really knows how far they will go under order until they are faced with
In the case of Milgram's experiment, if he would have informed his participants that they were being tested on how far they would go when they were ordered to do so, even if it was against their conscience, the participants would never have gone as far as they did and the research would have been fundamentally flawed. There is no accurate way to test human nature if the participants change their behavior based on what is expected of them. "The tendency of people to portray themselves in a more favorable light than their thoughts or actions, is called socially desirable responding (Lalwani)." Socially desirable responding is one of the problems with the use of surveys, and the problem carries over to behavioral studies. If the "teachers" from Milgram's experiment had been told the real purpose of the study, they most likely would have applied far less shock, if they shocked at all because that is what is socially acceptable. No one really knows how far they will go under order until they are faced with