How_and_Why_Milgram's_Research_on_Obedience_Contributed_to_Our_Understanding_of_Human_Behaviour

How and why Milgram’s research on obedience contributed to our understanding of human behaviour This report aims to * Briefly outline Milgram’s obedience to authority study. * Explain how and why Milgram’s work on obedience contributed to our understanding of human behaviour. * Why are these findings relevant today' Background Milgram was one of the most pioneering and dynamic social psychologists of his generation. He embarked on many studies which examined social psychological aspects of everyday life (Banyard 2010 p.67) Milgram is probably most notable for his obedience to authority study; which is noted as the study which would define social psychology over the next fifty years. (Banyard 2010 p.62) His work was inspired by the question how could the horrors of the second world have happened and how could they be prevented in the future. His objective was to explore what made individuals do evil things, if they were put in a situation where there was an authoritive figure insisting they cause harm to another person. Would they choose to comply or would their personal conscience drive them to do the right thing' The reason Milgram’s research became so ground breaking was because it held up a mirror for people to see themselves in and the image wasn’t as nice as they expected (Banyard 2010 p.63) The Experiment Milgram’s study of obedience is one of the most famous psychological studies of the 20th century, with far reaching implications for our understanding of human behaviour and cruelty The experimenter orders the teacher whom is actually the subject of the experiment to give what the subject believes are painful electric shocks to a learner, who is actually an actor and colleague. The subjects believed that for each wrong answer, the learner was receiving actual shocks, but in reality there were no shocks. Being separated from the subject, the colleague set up a pre-recorded tape which played sounds for each shock level. The experiment was carried out this way consistently. The experiment found that most participants would administer potentially lethal levels of shock to another human being just because they were told to do so by an authority figure. (Banyard 2010 p.76) Ethics There have been many who criticised Milgram’s study. Among them was fellow psychologist Diana Baumrind. She questioned whether Milgram had protected the welfare of the participants. Using quotes from his initial report to demonstrate his lack of consideration shown towards them. She claimed he was somewhat detached when describing the emotional turmoil the participants were Lisa Pritchard A2638010 put through. In addition to Baumrind’s claims Banyard (2010) claims that at the end of the study many of the participants were relieved and appeared remorseful. However, contrary to the latter, Milgram was fully aware of the psychological instability that the participants were being put through. He claimed it was necessary for participants to be put under an element of pressure due to the nature of his study which was to highlight the way that ordinary people living ordinary lives are capable in being part of such cruel acts (Banyard 2010 p.80) Milgram was so aware of the potential harm caused by the study participants were interviewed and debriefed immediately after the experiment to check they were in a good frame of mind. Debriefing is now common practice where as it wasn’t during the 1960’s which demonstrates that Milgram was ahead of his time in terms of ethics (Banyard 2010 p.81) Milgrams basic defence was that the harm to the participants was not as great as it might appear, and for some of them the change in their understanding of their own behaviour and the behaviour of others was a positive event (Banyard 2010 p.81) Are Milgram’s findings still relevant today...' In order for results of experiments to be kept current psychologists perform replications in which they carry out additional research on different populations, in different historical and social perspectives and discover whether similar results can be attained (banyard 2010 p.84) Most recently, Burger (2009) did a partial replication of the Milgram experiment. To avoid ethical problems, he replicated the instructions only up to the point at which participants first heard the learner's verbal protests (150 volts). Of the Milgram participants who went beyond the 150 volt point, 79% went clear to the end (450 volts) so Burger concluded that his results could be roughly compared to Milgram's. And one could accurately explore the issue of obedience using similar procedures (banyard 2010 p.88) Conclusion * The Milgram Experiment raised questions about the ethics of scientific experimentation because of the extreme emotional stress suffered by the participants. These questions have imposed the conception of new creative ways to study obedience * The 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 * Replications of Milgram’s original study have found high levels of obedience * Milgram’s study, repeated under many different conditions, revealed that human beings naturally tend to obey authority.