The Milgram Experiment

The Milgram Experiment

Student’s Name

Course/Unit number

Instructor’s Name

Due Date

 Intro to Psychology 

Identify the study (video) you selected.

The Bystander Effect

The Milgram Experiment

Learned Helplessness

The Stanford Prison Experiment

Summarize the results of this study and what implications it has with regards to human behavior and mental processes that you’ve learned about in Units 4-5. 

Discuss what is meant by the term states of consciousness and apply it to your research study, considering whether it impacted the behavior or mental processes of the subjects involved. 

Consider whether or not you think this research could explain the development of psychological disorders? Explain your reasoning using reference to the study and the disorder(s).

Theories lead to hypotheses, which lead to research. Explain which theory you think may have been the influence for the research study that you chose. (For example: psychodynamic, humanistic, social cognitive, behaviorism, or trait theory) Explain your reasoning using reference to the study and the theory.

Writing Requirements and Guidelines

Your Assignment should be 2-4 pages, not including the Cover and Reference pages. 

Your Assignment should include:

Cover page

Provide your name, title of Assignment, course and unit number, and date

Body

Answer the questions in complete sentences and paragraphs.

Reference Page

Sources in APA format

The Milgram Experiment

The Milgram experiment is a study that sought to establish whether there exist a conflict between personal conscience and obedience to authority. Milgram’s experiment is based on the genocide activities that occurred during the Nuremberg War Criminal trials and World War II. Stanley Milgram sought to explore the justifications offered by perpetrators the heinous acts, who indicated that their actions reflected obedience because they were merely following orders from their leaders (McLeod, 2007). Therefore, Milgram’s main aim was to determine the nature of obedience.

The experiment consisted of “teacher” and “learner” roles. Although the learner was a confederate of Milgram, the participants believed that he was one of them. The participants were informed that the experiment sought to establish the impact of punishment on learning ability. Therefore, they were required to administer electric shocks on the learner if he failed to provide correct answers. The intensity of the voltage would increase if the learner subsequently provided the wrong answers (Encina, 2014). The responses of the “teachers” were used to assess how obedience to orders influences a person’s actions.

Results

The results of the study indicate that some teachers declined to continue administering shocks, regardless of the experimenter urging them to proceed. Although this was the expected outcome, only less than half of the participants questioned the directives of the experimenter (Encina, 2014). Therefore, the majority on the other hand were willing to proceed with the action of inflicting shocks progressively.

The reactions of the participants towards inflicting higher levels of voltage were displayed through a variety of negative emotions and behaviors. For instance, Encina, (2014) indicates that some empathized with the learner, others displayed nervousness and discomfort, while there are participants who exhibited arrogant, hopeless, and cold behaviors. Despite the negative experiences, the participants continued to comply with the orders as issued by the experimenter to the extent of exerting the maximum voltage on the learner.

The Milgram’s experiment used different variations. For instance, there was one where the teacher was required to give the punishment by placing the learner’s hand on the shock button. This identified participants who were less obedient. Another variation required teachers to exert their desired voltage if the learner answered incorrectly. The average voltage was 83 volts, with only 2 percent of the subjects applying the maximum voltage (Encina, 2014). This indicates that the majority of participants were not evil, but good, average individuals.

With regard to the results, “teachers” were highly submissive if, the authority was at a close distance, they felt they could instill a sense of responsibility in others, and respected persons conducted the experiment. The experiment indicates that there are different groups of people as far as obedience to authority is concerned. For instance, a portion of the obedient participants blamed the experimenter, indicating that he would be responsible if the “learner” experienced problems, while some blamed the learner for being stubborn. This group obeys authority, but engages in self-justification.

There were participants who obeyed and engaged in self-blame. This is the group of people that do not agree with authority, but proceeds to execute orders. Lastly, some participants were rebellious, indicating the kind of people who question authority based on ethical justification. This type seeks to protect the welfare of others.

The study indicates that situation is a factor that tends to influence a person’s behavior. This is known as situational attribution, whereby people tend to behave in a certain way due to the situation they are in. However, people often make dispositional attribution if their behavior is considered incorrect. This is where one attribute behavior to another person.

Application of States of Consciousness

The state of consciousness is a term refers to awareness. This includes self-awareness and the awareness of the environment. Consciousness is in constant motion; hence, it is determined by a person’s state of mind and environmental changes. Therefore, brain wave patterns are determined by a person’s state of consciousness (SparkNotes Editors, 2005).

Awareness can be high or low. This is where a person invests more effort when making decisions and paying attention to something. Mindfulness is a high level of awareness that causes a person to is highly considered the impact of their thoughts. When an individual engages in a more effortful consideration, he or she is less likely to be influenced by environmental influences. Therefore, the less we pay attention, the more susceptible we are, to non-conscious stimuli (Biswas-Diener & Teeny, n.d.). Therefore, low thinking states are more susceptible to external stimuli, while high thinking states are highly susceptible.

In this regard, the state of consciousness of the participants may have influenced their actions. For instance, the experimenter less likely influenced the participants who had a high level of awareness. Therefore, this may have led them to rebel the orders of the experimenter. On the other hand, the participants with low awareness were more likely to comply with the experimenter’s directives, since they engaged in a less effortful consideration. Therefore, they were susceptible to non-conscious stimuli.

Development of psychological disorders

The Milgram’s experiment can help explain various psychological disorders such as personality disorders. This can occur in a context where a person who believes in ethical practices is influenced by an authority figure, whereby one is required to act in an unethical manner.

For instance, this may occur in an abusive family, where a child becomes violent because his or her parents are aggressive or abusive. The child may act violently when in the family environment in order to seek approval from his or her parents, but act normal when outside the family environment. In such cases, a child may develop personality disorders such as the split personality disorder. Therefore, the Milgram experiment can help explain how environmental forces lead to the development of personality disorders.

Theoretical Foundation

Research studies are often guided by different theories; hence most of them have a strong theoretical foundation. With regard to the Milgram’s experiment, the behaviorism theory can help explain the purpose of study. The behaviorism perspective explains that external forces influence human behavior. It asserts that behavior should be studied by focusing on a person’s environmental influences, since they tend to determine their course of action. Therefore, the person has no free will to determine their behavioral outcomes.

Based on these assumptions, the Milgram experiment seeks to establish whether the participants’ behavior towards obedience was influenced by dispositional (personality) factors or situational (external) factors. As indicated by the results, obedience to authority figures is mainly influenced by situational elements as opposed to dispositional factors. On the other hand, rebellion of orders by authority figures is mainly determined by internal elements, compared to external elements.

References

Biswas-Diener, R., & Teeny,J. (n.d.). States of Consciousness. Retrieved from http://nobaproject.com/modules/states-of-consciousness

Encina, G.B. (2014). Milgram’s Experiment on Obedience to Authority. Retrieved from https://nature.berkeley.edu/ucce50/ag-labor/7article/article35.htm

McLeod, S. (2007). The Milgram Experiment. Retrieved from http://www.simplypsychology.org/milgram.html

SparkNotes Editors. (2005). SparkNote on States of Consciousness. Retrieved July 28, 2016, from http://www.sparknotes.com/psychology/psych101/consciousness/