This psychology research is one of the most famous in history and was done in 1960. The purpose of this research was to determine the extent to which the subjects were willing to obey authority while inflicting pain on the victim. The voltage used in shocking the victims ranged from zero to 450 voltages. They were divided into intervals of 30, on the subjects were allowed to move from one level to another under the experimenter's direction ( Yükselbaba, 2017) . During the course of the experiment, the subject would look at the experimental and ask for advice on whether to proceed with the shocking levels or stop. On the other hand, the experimenter pushed the subjects to go higher the levels up to the maximum. I was surprised by the results of the experiment. Unlike all other experiments, the focus of this one was inflicting pain on a victim where the subject watched and was tested on how far they were willing to go against their will (Hollander & Maynard, 2016). The sheer obedience of authorities to harm the victim despite childhood lessons about moral conduct and not harming people against their will. This strength it takes for one to harm another person against their will is very surprising as it goes against any teachings you can have as they grow up.
I was surprised by the different levels the subjects are willing to go while inflicting pain on the victim’ who was begging for mercy in return. Although the primary focus understood the extent people can do under authority, I believe this experiment's nature was far cruder to the subject if their limits of conflict were being tested. The other surprising aspect of the experiment was the ability to make the victim act like they’re in pain of being shocked (Hollander & Maynard, 2016). The success of this experiment depended on its ability to be as close to reality as possible. This was surprisingly achieved by how a good number of responding was able to back out of their shocks experiments due to getting to the point of rapture and eventually disobedience. The conflict that existed within the victim was able to keep following the authority figure's directives, the experiment, Or listen to their conscience and stop inflicting pain on an innocent victim. The experiment's success was also determined from the post-experiment interview, which all the subjects underwent (Haslam et al., 2015).
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
This experiment Presented different aspects of human beings under different circumstances. The experiment shows that human beings have the capability of inflicting pain on other people under the direction of people in authority. This experiment can be related to real-life situations where people in power ( Yükselbaba, 2017) . In organized crime, for instance, gang leaders order their subjects to torture or kill their victims, and the directions are allowed to the authority they possess among the gang members. This, in case it happens in law enforcement agencies and military where people in authority order their subject to harm other people either information or any other purposes.
The result of the experiment also displays other aspects of human nature, such as empathy and conscience. Most of the subjects could not go on with the experiment for fear of hurting an innocent person. The conflict within the subject was able to obey authority or listen to their conscience and stop hurting the victim. However, as mentioned, none of the victims were actually being shocked but rather were actors who pretended to feel the pain of being shocked (Vogels, 2014). However, the result of the experiment showed that a majority of the subjects actually believe they were inflicting pain on the victims in the experiment. The more they increase the voltage, the more pain the victim displayed, thereby increasing the conflict within this subject. The subject kept inflicting pain under the experimental direction until they reached 300 volts before the victim began to show extreme pain as a response to the shocks.
The subject what led to believe that the victims in the experiment had volunteered willingly to participate in the experiment making it easier for them to begin the shocking process while asking the victim's series of questions (Haslam et al., 2015). However, with every increase in voltage, the pain level increased, an aspect that led the subject to empathize with the victims in the experiment. The other conflicting aspect of the experiment was the subjects' responsibilities, but they had also volunteered to participate in the experiment hence had an obligation to aid in its completion ( Yükselbaba, 2017) . This experiment shows that human beings are capable of harming others under the direction of a person in authority despite their knowledge of how wrong this action is. The subject was willing to inflict pain on other people, with the primary motivation being the payment they will receive. This showed that morality and the sense of right or wrong could be undermined by the directions of a person in authority.
If I were doing this study, I would have done several things differently, such as the subjects' choice. I would love to direct this subject inflict pain and follow the protocol, but I will stand by and not offer further direction, thereby watching the extent to which the subjects would have gone through with the experiment on their own. I would also reduce the voltage used to reduce the level of pain the subject thought the victim was having and see the results. If this experiment was done today, I believe there is also be the same as the fundamental aspects of human nature that do not change (Russell, 2014). The respect and obedience of authority have not changed society. So is human nature has a conscience and understands the implications of inflicting pain or not human being against their will. Since the same variables will be implicated in the experiment, there is a very high likelihood that the experiment results will be the same as the one conducted in 1960.
I believe this was an ethical study as it followed all the procedures implicated in the ethical code of conduct in research. Subjects and the victims were all informed in advance of the roles they will play in the research. They were also not coerced into inflicting pain on the victims but rather obey the directive of the experimenter (Haslam et al., 2015). The subjects were also allowed to stop whenever they reached the point of rapture and disobeyed the experimenter. The victims of the study were also not harmed. They were actors who pretended to feel pain whenever the subjects pressed the buttons after asking questions. Since none of the victims were actually in pain, the experiment was ethical.
References
Haslam, S. A., Reicher, S. D., & Millard, K. (2015). Shock treatment: Using immersive digital realism to restage and re-examine Milgram’s ‘Obedience to Authority’research. PloS one , 10 (3), e109015.
Hollander, M. M., & Maynard, D. W. (2016). Do unto others...? Methodological advance and self-versus other-attentive resistance in milgram’s “obedience” experiments. Social Psychology Quarterly , 79 (4), 355-375.
Russell, N. (2014). Stanley Milgram’s obedience to authority “relationship” condition: Some methodological and theoretical implications. Social Sciences , 3 (2), 194-214.
Vogels, S. R. (2014). The Milgram experiment: Its impact and interpretation. Social Cosmos , 5 (1), 15-21.
Yükselbaba, Ü. (2017). Milgram experiment about authority and obedience. İstanbul Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Mecmuası , 75 (1), 227-270.
