下載本文檔
版權(quán)說明:本文檔由用戶提供并上傳,收益歸屬內(nèi)容提供方,若內(nèi)容存在侵權(quán),請(qǐng)進(jìn)行舉報(bào)或認(rèn)領(lǐng)
文檔簡介
1、The Milgram ObedienceExperimentThe Perils ofObedienceByKendra Cherry,A GuideThe social psychology of this century reveals a major lesson: often it is not so much the kind of person a man is as the kind of situation in which he finds himself that determines how he will act. Stanley Milgram, 1974 If a
2、 person in a position of authority ordered you to deliver a 400-volt electrical shock to another person, would you follow orders? Most people would answer this question with an adamant no, but Yale University psychologist Stanley Milgram conducted a series of obedience experiments during the 1960s t
3、hat demonstrated surprising results. These experiments offer a powerful and disturbing look into the power of authority and obedience.Introduction to the Milgram ExperimentMilgram started his experiments in 1961, shortly after the trial of the World War II criminal Adolph Eichmann had begun. Eichman
4、ns defense that he was simply following instructions when he ordered the deaths of millions of Jews roused Milgrams interest. In his 1974 book Obedience to Authority, Milgram posed the question, Could it be that Eichmann and his million accomplices in the Holocaust were just following orders? Could
5、we call them all accomplices? Method Used in the Milgram ExperimentThe participants in the Milgram experiment were 40 men recruited using newspaper ads. In exchange for their participation, each person was paid $4.50. Milgram developed an intimidating shock generator, with shock levels starting at 3
6、0 volts and increasing in 15-volt increments all the way up to 450 volts. The many switches were labeled with terms including slight shock, moderate shock and danger: severe shock. The final two switches were labeled simply with an ominous XXX. Each participant took the role of a teacher who would t
7、hen deliver a shock to the student every time an incorrect answer was produced. While the participant believed that he was delivering real shocks to the student, the student was actually a confederate in the experiment who was simply pretending to be shocked. As the experiment progressed, the partic
8、ipant would hear the learner plead to be released or even complain about a heart condition. Once the 300-volt level had been reached, the learner banged on the wall and demanded to be released. Beyond this point, the learner became completely silent and refused to answer any more questions. The expe
9、rimenter then instructed the participant to treat this silence as an incorrect response and deliver a further shock. Most participants asked the experimenter whether they should continue. The experimenter issued a series of commands to prod the participant along:1. Please continue. 2. The experiment
10、 requires that you continue. 3. It is absolutely essential that you continue. 4. You have no other choice, you must go on.Results of the Milgram ExperimentThe level of shock that the participant was willing to deliver was used as the measure of obedience. How far do you think that most participants
11、were willing to go? When Milgram posed this question to a group of Yale University students, it was predicted that no more than 3 out of 100 participants would deliver the maximum shock. In reality, 65% of the participants in Milgrams study delivered the maximum shocks. Of the 40 participants in the
12、 study, 26 delivered the maximum shocks while 14 stopped before reaching the highest levels. It is important to note that many of the subjects became extremely agitated, distraught and angry at the experimenter. Yet they continued to follow orders all the way to the end. Because of concerns about th
13、e amount of anxiety experienced by many of the participants, all subjects were debriefed at the end of the experiment to explain the procedures and the use of deception. However, many critics of the study have argued that many of the participants were still confused about the exact nature of the exp
14、eriment. Milgram later surveyed the participants and found that 84% were glad to have participated, while only 1% regretted their involvement.Discussion of the Milgram ExperimentWhile Milgrams research raised serious ethical questions about the use of human subjects in psychology experiments, his re
15、sults have also been consistently replicated in further experiments. Thomas Blass (1999) reviewed further research on obedience and found that Milgrams findings hold true in other experiments. Why did so many of the participants in this experiment perform a seemingly sadistic act on the instruction
16、of an authority figure? According to Milgram, there are a number of situational factors that can explain such high levels of obedience: The physical presence of an authority figure dramatically increased compliance. The fact that the study was sponsored by Yale (a trusted and authoritative academic
17、institution) led many participants to believe that the experiment must be safe. The selection of teacher and learner status seemed random. Participants assumed that the experimenter was a competent expert. The shocks were said to be painful, not dangerous.Later experiments conducted by Milgram indic
18、ated that the presence of rebellious peers dramatically reduced obedience levels. When other people refused to go along with the experimenters orders, 36 out of 40 participants refused to deliver the maximum shocks. Ordinary people, simply doing their jobs, and without any particular hostility on their part, can become agents in a terrible destructive process. Moreover, even when the des
溫馨提示
- 1. 本站所有資源如無特殊說明,都需要本地電腦安裝OFFICE2007和PDF閱讀器。圖紙軟件為CAD,CAXA,PROE,UG,SolidWorks等.壓縮文件請(qǐng)下載最新的WinRAR軟件解壓。
- 2. 本站的文檔不包含任何第三方提供的附件圖紙等,如果需要附件,請(qǐng)聯(lián)系上傳者。文件的所有權(quán)益歸上傳用戶所有。
- 3. 本站RAR壓縮包中若帶圖紙,網(wǎng)頁內(nèi)容里面會(huì)有圖紙預(yù)覽,若沒有圖紙預(yù)覽就沒有圖紙。
- 4. 未經(jīng)權(quán)益所有人同意不得將文件中的內(nèi)容挪作商業(yè)或盈利用途。
- 5. 人人文庫網(wǎng)僅提供信息存儲(chǔ)空間,僅對(duì)用戶上傳內(nèi)容的表現(xiàn)方式做保護(hù)處理,對(duì)用戶上傳分享的文檔內(nèi)容本身不做任何修改或編輯,并不能對(duì)任何下載內(nèi)容負(fù)責(zé)。
- 6. 下載文件中如有侵權(quán)或不適當(dāng)內(nèi)容,請(qǐng)與我們聯(lián)系,我們立即糾正。
- 7. 本站不保證下載資源的準(zhǔn)確性、安全性和完整性, 同時(shí)也不承擔(dān)用戶因使用這些下載資源對(duì)自己和他人造成任何形式的傷害或損失。
最新文檔
- 2026年杭州余杭區(qū)倉前中學(xué)第一批公開招聘事業(yè)編制教師2人考試參考題庫及答案解析
- 2026河南許昌市魏都區(qū)北大社區(qū)衛(wèi)生服務(wù)中心招聘1人考試參考題庫及答案解析
- 2026廣東惠州博羅縣第三人民醫(yī)院招聘石灣鎮(zhèn)湖山村鄉(xiāng)村衛(wèi)生從業(yè)人員1人考試備考試題及答案解析
- 2026云南師范大學(xué)實(shí)驗(yàn)中學(xué)盤龍校區(qū)面向教育部直屬師范大學(xué)開展公費(fèi)師范畢業(yè)生招聘考試參考題庫及答案解析
- 2026年蕪湖市西灣中學(xué)招聘頂崗教師1名考試參考試題及答案解析
- 2026重慶渝高中學(xué)校招聘教師考試備考試題及答案解析
- 2026年豐城市市屬國企下屬公司管理崗及專業(yè)技術(shù)崗招聘【24人】筆試模擬試題及答案解析
- 2026年漯河市第六人民醫(yī)院(市心血管病醫(yī)院)人才引進(jìn)備考題庫有答案詳解
- 2026年鄭州高新區(qū)科學(xué)大道第二小學(xué)教師招聘備考題庫完整參考答案詳解
- 天津醫(yī)科大學(xué)口腔醫(yī)院2026年人事代理制(第二批)招聘實(shí)施備考題庫及答案詳解一套
- 燈展活動(dòng)安全協(xié)議書
- 2026中國醫(yī)藥招標(biāo)市場發(fā)展趨勢與前景展望戰(zhàn)略研究報(bào)告
- 藥品追溯管理培訓(xùn)試題附答案
- 《國家十五五規(guī)劃綱要》全文
- 腹部手術(shù)圍手術(shù)期疼痛管理指南(2025版)課件
- 2025年《思想道德與法治》期末考試題庫及答案
- 2025初一英語閱讀理解100篇
- 2026屆四川省成都市青羊區(qū)樹德實(shí)驗(yàn)中學(xué)物理九年級(jí)第一學(xué)期期末考試試題含解析
- 林業(yè)種苗培育與管理技術(shù)規(guī)范
- 修復(fù)征信服務(wù)合同范本
- 固定管板式柴油冷卻器的設(shè)計(jì)與計(jì)算
評(píng)論
0/150
提交評(píng)論