The Psychology Book (79 page)

252 STANLEY MILGRAM

teachers) to be obedient and to

carried out by the Nazis. However,

debriefed after the experiment.

follow orders—especially the rules

the conflict between a person’s

Self-knowledge, he argued, is a

set forth by authority figures. As

conscience and external authority

valuable asset, despite the

Milgram says, “obedience is as

exerts a huge internal pressure, and

discomfort that the participants

basic an element in the structure

Milgram felt that this accounted for

may have felt when forced to

of social life as one can point to…

the extreme distress experienced

confront the fact that they behaved

it serves numerous productive

by the participants in his study.

in a previously unthinkable way.

functions.” But equally, the

However, many psychologists

inhumane policies of the death

Ethical concerns

remained uneasy, and the study

camps in World War II “could only

There were many ethical concerns

was ultimately crucial in the

be carried out on a massive scale

associated with Milgram’s study.

development of ethical standards of

if a very large number of persons

When it was first published, the

psychological experimentation. It

obeyed orders.” His experiments

ensuing controversy was so great

helped to define important principles

clearly demonstrated that normally

that the American Psychological

such as the avoidance of intentional

harmless people become capable

Association revoked his membership

deceit of participants, and the need

of committing cruel acts when a

for a full year. However, it was

to protect experimental participants

situation pressures them to do so.

eventually reinstated, and Milgram’s

from emotional suffering.

In describing his results,

1974 book
Obedience to Authority

Milgram also turned to the theory of

received the annual Social

Cross-cultural validity

conformism, which states that when

Psychology Award.

Another criticism of Milgram’s

a person has neither the ability nor

The major concern was that

study was that he used an

expertise to make a decision, he will

the participants in the experiment

unrepresentative sample: American

look to the group to decide how to

were explicitly deceived, both about

men do not necessarily reflect the

behave. Conformity can limit and

the nature of the study and about

general population. Even so, Milgram

distort an individual’s response to

the reality of the electric shocks.

was able to conclude that obedience

a situation, and seems to result in a

Milgram’s defense was that he

was not a particular feature found in

diffusion of responsibility—which

could not have obtained realistic

the minds of 20th-century Germans,

Milgram felt was crucial to

results without employing deception,

but something more universal. A

comprehending the atrocities

and all of the participants were

number of cross-cultural replications

The behavior of Nazis
during

World War II had been attributed to

a prevalence of the “authoritarian

personality” in the population; this was

questioned by Milgram’s experiments.

Obedience to authority is not a

feature of German culture, but

a seemingly universal feature

of human behavior.

Stanley Milgram

SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY 253

In wartime, a soldier does

not ask whether it is good

or bad to bomb a hamlet.

Stanley Milgram

American soldiers in Vietnam

reported that their behavior became

unacceptable by degrees—as with

the shock generator—until they found

themselves murdering innocents.

of the original experiment have

twice: first with the virtual learner

historical examples of people using

demonstrated remarkably high

communicating only by text, and

their authority to persuade others to

consistency in results within

then with the computer-generated

commit crimes against humanity.

societies, but slight differences

model visible on screen. Those with

Equally importantly, Milgram

between one country and another.

only text contact with the learner

showed that it is “not so much the

For example, in most of North

had little trouble administering the

kind of person a man is, as the kind

America and Europe, results are

shocks; but when the virtual learner

of situation in which he finds

very similar to those found in

was visible, participants acted

himself that determines how he

Milgram’s original experiment, with

exactly as they had in Milgram’s

will act.” Instead of examining

very high percentages of obedience.

original experiment.

personalities to explain crimes, he

Asian studies, however, show even

says, we should examine the

greater levels of obedience (in East

Society demands obedience

context, or situation.

Asian and Muslim countries in

The notion of a society rests on an

Milgram’s seminal study was

particular), while aboriginal African

understanding that individuals are

heavily criticized at the time, not

and Latin American populations,

prepared to relinquish some personal

least because it painted an

as well as the Inuit peoples of

autonomy and look to others of

unappealing and chilling portrait

Canada, show far less obedience.

higher authority and social status

of human nature. It is easier to

to make decisions on a larger scale

believe that there are fundamental

Virtual torture

or from a higher, broader perspective.

differences between the Nazis and

In 2006, the psychologist Mel Slater

Even the most democratic of

the rest of humanity than to accept

set out to see what the effect would

societies requires the rulings of a

that in certain situations, many of

be if participants were made

recognized, legitimate authority to

us are capable of committing

explicitly aware that the situation

take precedence over individual

extraordinary acts of violence.

was not real. His replication used a

self-regulation, in pursuit of the

Milgram held up a light to the dark

computer simulation of the learner

greater collective good. In order

realities concerning power and the

and shock process, so participants

for any society to function, its

consequences of our tendency to

administering the shocks were fully

populace must agree to obey its

obey authority figures, and in so

aware that the learner was computer-

rules. Legitimacy is, of course,

doing, he simultaneously absolved

generated. The experiment was run

the key, and there are countless

and made villains of us all. ■

254

WHAT HAPPENS

WHEN YOU PUT

GOOD PEOPLE

IN AN EVIL PLACE?

PHILIP ZIMBARDO (1933– )

willingly use (or abuse) the power

IN CONTEXT

S
tanley Milgram’s shocking

obedience studies revealed

granted to them? In 1971 he carried

that people will obey

out the now-famous Stanford Prison

APPROACH

authority figures even if this entails

experiment, using 24 middle-class

Conformity

acting against their own moral

American college students who had

BEFORE

convictions. In the aftermath, Philip

undergone tests to establish that

1935
Muzafer Sherif

Zimbardo set out to discover how

they were mentally healthy.

demonstrates how groups

people would behave if they were

On the flip of a coin the students

quickly come to develop a

put into a position of authority with

were randomly assigned the role of

“social norm” in his autokinetic

unimpeded power. Would they

either “guard” or “prisoner,” and one

effect experiments.

1940s
Kurt Lewin shows how

What happens when you put good people

people’s behavior changes

in an evil place?

as their situations are altered.

1963
Stanley Milgram conducts

his obedience studies, which

demonstrate that people will

Normal, healthy people start to behave

obey authority even if it means

according to the
social roles
assigned to them.

committing cruel acts.

AFTER

2002
British psychologists

Steven Reicher and Alex

Those in the
position of

Those in a
subordinate

Haslam extend Zimbardo’s

power
will naturally use

position
will submit to

study to explore positive rather

(and abuse) their authority.

authority.

than negative group behavior.

2004
Zimbardo defends a

former Abu Ghraib prison

guard in court, arguing that

the circumstances caused

It is the
power of social situations
, rather than the

the guard’s cruel behavior.

dispositions of people, that leads to
evil behavior
.

SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY 255

See also:
John B. Watson 66–71 ■ Zing-Yang Kuo 75 ■ Kurt Lewin 218–23 ■

Elliot Aronson 244–45 ■ Stanley Milgram 246–53 ■ Muzafer Sherif 337

To the researchers’ amazement,

the environment quickly became so

threatening to participants that the

study had to be ended after only six

days. Every guard became abusive

and authoritarian; prisoners were

denied food or bedding, hooded,

chained, and made to clean toilet

bowls with their hands. As the

boredom increased, they used the

prisoners as their playthings,

Philip Zimbardo

making them take part in degrading