Poll: You're in the Milgram Experiment!

[Vrach]

I'm going to make a prediction.

The majority of the people in this thread are going to say "no way, I'd totally stop!"

The majority of those people will be wrong.

-m

Exactly why would one keep going? Or even agree to such a study in the first place?

Oh and someone's been watching CSI: Miami?

To answer your questions (in reverse order):

One would participate in this study as a blind participant, unaware of what you were going to be required to do or what the purpose of the study was. (this study would not meet ethics standards any more, by the by.)


One would keep going, because, well, that's what people do - they succumb to the pressure being placed on them by a figure of authority, and proceed to inflict pain and torture (or so they think) on a victim beyond the point of unconsciousness or death - and in 65% of cases, right up to the maximum amount of punishment they are able and required to inflict.

this is a super famous experiment that's been repeated many, many times. It was undertaken to explore the kinds of situations that led to the actions of Nazi soldiers in world war 2, and has actually granted a great deal of insight with regards to how willing soldiers, and people in subordinate positions are to push past their own rationality to follow the orders of a superior.

The results of the experiment should be shocking and scary - because they reveal a very dark thing about human nature. The conditions that led to the horrotrs commited by the nazis are not that difficult to replicate, even among every day people.

-m

Aye, I understand how the experiment works, I'm sorta familiar with it (although less so than you obviously), but personally I don't see myself doing it. If I had a gun to my head? Yeah, I'd likely keep pressing the button (although even then it's a stretch). Just because it's an authority? I don't really see that happening at all.

Incidentally, how is a random psychologist who doesn't threaten you in any way, merely telling you you're not responsible for your actions viewed as an authority figure? Maybe that's the issue, I'm just against assumed authority :\

 

[Nigh Invulnerable]

I'm going to make a prediction.

The majority of the people in this thread are going to say "no way, I'd totally stop!"

The majority of those people will be wrong.

-m

Exactly why would one keep going? Or even agree to such a study in the first place?

Oh and someone's been watching CSI: Miami?

1st question: people keep going because the perceived authority figure tells them to (and no, you're not the unique rebel who would never do such a thing. 65% went to full strength and most of the rest went a ways up the shock scale).

2nd question: because you're a psych student who got asked to by a professor. Maybe they're paying you $100 for your participation. Whatever the reason you agreed to participate, you did not know the nature of the experiment until you got there (most likely).

People like to think they'll refuse a questionable order, but in reality we're very good at rationalizing our actions. In this experiment I'm sure people told themselves they weren't responsible, the man in the labcoat was, and so they kept going. Also, people inherently trust authorities to some degree, so I'm sure there were a lot of, "This guy knows what he's doing. I'm surely not going to cause that man serious harm."

 

[Kenjitsuka]

I'd keep going, just like almost everyone in the experiment did.

 

[The Unworthy Gentleman]

I'd like to think that I would stop, but I'm unsure whether my morals or my desire for scientific progression. It's something that I'd have to decide at the time.

 

[MelasZepheos_v1legacy]

I know about the Milgram Experiment so I would stop from experience.

The whole point of it was that no one knew, and you can't know for it to work.

If I had been in the original experiment I don't know if I would have continued. Given my reactions to authority figures in the past I'd say the presence of an authority figure I didn't know wouldn't dissuade me. (An authority figure I did know might convince me though) and I don't really have the stomach for human suffering, especially physical human suffering, so I like to think I'd stop out of disgust and fear at my actions, and not restart because I was told to.

Of course, I can't know for sure.

 

[Chibz]

I would refuse to participate at all.

 

[crudus]

I totally wouldn't stop. Nothing motivates me more than a guy with a clipboard and a lab coat telling what to do.

I'm going to make a prediction.

The majority of the people in this thread are going to say "no way, I'd totally stop!"

The majority of those people will be wrong.

-m

I think there was a study done about this phenomenon(the difference in what people say and what they do). Although the difference isn't as big as I would have thought. Then again, there is the middle ground option which skews the results way too much.

People are assholes. That's what the experiment showed.

Not really. We are social creatures which means we naturally honor until a hierarchy and yield to people with authority.

 

[Matt_LRR]

Incidentally, how is a random psychologist who doesn't threaten you in any way, merely telling you you're not responsible for your actions viewed as an authority figure? Maybe that's the issue, I'm just against assumed authority :\

It's to do with the way the experiment is constructed.

You're taken into the experiment blind.

You don't know what you're going to be asked to do, or what is being studied.

You're being give a payment to participate in the study.

The Scientist is presented to you as knowing whats going on.

You're told to follow the scientists orders.

You are told that the scientist is in control.

You are told that all you have to do is go along with what he says.

You are told that you are not responsible for the consequenses of your actions.

You are told that you have to complete the experiment or the whole study will be ruined.

You are put in a nondescript and closed room, isolated from others (except for the scientist).


You've now been given pressure to complete by natre of:

-a percieved lack of understanding
-a percieved authority figure
-a percieved contractual obligation
-a lack of social support
-a percived danger of damaging the study

and so on.

The situation is key. It's not hard to construct intense situational pressure to complete.

And most people do.

-m

 

[Zaverexus]

I'm going to make a prediction.

The majority of the people in this thread are going to say "no way, I'd totally stop!"

The majority of those people will be wrong.

-m

Having read about said experiment, I would have to agree. Now time to check the poll results... Oh! What a surprise!

 

[Amethyst Wind]

I'm going to make a prediction.

The majority of the people in this thread are going to say "no way, I'd totally stop!"

The majority of those people will be wrong.

-m

Well that's not really fair. Certainly they'll be lying, but they might not be wrong. Anything said about a hypothetical situation when removed from said situation is a lie as there's no way to prove what would happen except to go through the situation, and even then that's only for that particular occurrence. They could say they'll do X and indeed end up doing X, which when proclaimed would be a lie but still end up being what happened, so they'll have lied but also been right.

 

[Vrach]

I'm going to make a prediction.

The majority of the people in this thread are going to say "no way, I'd totally stop!"

The majority of those people will be wrong.

-m

Exactly why would one keep going? Or even agree to such a study in the first place?

Oh and someone's been watching CSI: Miami?

1st question: people keep going because the perceived authority figure tells them to (and no, you're not the unique rebel who would never do such a thing. 65% went to full strength and most of the rest went a ways up the shock scale).

2nd question: because you're a psych student who got asked to by a professor. Maybe they're paying you $100 for your participation. Whatever the reason you agreed to participate, you did not know the nature of the experiment until you got there (most likely).

People like to think they'll refuse a questionable order, but in reality we're very good at rationalizing our actions. In this experiment I'm sure people told themselves they weren't responsible, the man in the labcoat was, and so they kept going. Also, people inherently trust authorities to some degree, so I'm sure there were a lot of, "This guy knows what he's doing. I'm surely not going to cause that man serious harm."

Fair enough. But I doubt I'd rationalise that way after seeing the man in pain. I charged a pack of 4 wild dogs for ripping a random street cat apart, causing (especially prolonged) harm to a human being is not something I'd be easily coaxed into doing. Not to mention my awareness of the amount of electricity that is easily able to stop a heart - which is why I would tell the man inviting me to conduct a study that involves an exponentially growing amount of electricity being run through a human being to shove a rusty steel pipe up his arse before we'd even get started

edit: Oh, for Matt:

-a percieved lack of understanding
-a percieved authority figure
-a percieved contractual obligation
-a lack of social support
-a percived danger of damaging the study

- Causing harm, pain and a potentially lethal amount damage to a human being is all that I can understand in the situation where I'm given no other information
- I don't accept the authority of a figure until I have a reason to
- I have the option of going on or stopping. Someone else's study that I know nothing about is less important to me than pain, damage and potential death of another human being
- I don't need social support to know inflicting pain and possible death is wrong
- See point about contractual obligation

 

[El Poncho]

Does the psychologist have anything to prevent me from not doing it?

 

[badgersprite]

You know, you're really invalidating the purpose of this experiment by showing it to us like this, since it takes out all of the elements that actually make it work. None of us here are fair judges of ourselves or what we would do. We aren't unbiased observers of ourselves.

From past experiences, though, I think I would leave before I was even told to shock him the first time, because I honestly can't stand the thought of causing pain to someone. I would be too uncomfortable with the idea even the first time, because I'd be too afraid of something going wrong. Shocking a guy even once would feel totally unsafe to me, and I don't respect the authority of these so-called superiors, so there's no reason for me to follow their orders. I'll freely admit that I distrust authority, so their assurances mean nothing to me, because I would believe that they don't give a fuck about the wellbeing of the test subject (even though I know that's an irrational response since they obviously aren't hurting the guy in the experiment).

So, yeah, I would react totally irrationally and walk out on the experiment, possibly causing an embarrassingly big scene before I realized it was fake, and then felt stupid.

 

[Mr.Mattress]

I am pretty sure I would stop when I heard the first scream of terror. Then again, I'd never know unless given the test.

 

[Gudrests]

I'm going to make a prediction.

The majority of the people in this thread are going to say "no way, I'd totally stop!"

The majority of those people will be wrong.

-m

JUST LIKE DESSERT BUSS!!.....we knew you were all in massive amounts of pain...but they just kept giving you more time NA I would continue to shock the guy. I truthfully have tryed to hurt people worse and i saw there face..........

P.S for last dessert Bus i was broke and had no job. This year i will donate what i can...just...not 2k and be like them other guys...thats just crazy...but good crazy. it helps sick children

 

[Mad World]

I'd stop. There's no way I'd keep on shocking him; it would have been obvious that he was in too much pain. Also, I wouldn't trust the psychologist (for obvious reasons).

 

[Glademaster_v1legacy]

I would discontinue once it gets to lethal levels like over 400 volts. No one is making me stay so there is no reason to. Also since I didn't know he was an actor I would think I was actually killing him. Regardless of any ethics I am not going to prison for man slaughter/murder which I would if he were being shocked and died. So ethics aside I wouldn't due to having to go to prison. I seriously doubt there would be the proper legal documents to get me out of that. If it is for Science can he not press the button himself or just get someone else to do it.

 

[lionsprey]

Well first of, I doubt I would participate in any survey/experiment if it involved causing harm/strong discomfort but if I ended up in that chair i would most likely not only stop pushing the button i would also call the police or punch the psychologist in the face or help the man get out/take him to the hospital (or at least as far as i would make it before they reviled the truth).
kinda risking to sound like a bad saturdaymorning cartoon but i would do it becouse i'm a good guy deep down that wants to make the world a better place.
although i have opinions on what should be done with people like the psychologist and it ain't pretty so im not a saint.

 

[bluefiresword]

As one who is against suffering, Especial inflicted on to somebody who cant fight back or do anything, I would stop the moment the pain sounded more worrying than a jolt, like with one of those shock pens. If he told me to continue, I would until the pain sounded very bad and he starts banging. I would then turn to the leader of the experiment, and demand he lets him go. If he didn't I Would still insist. If he still carried on, I would get violent.

I hate pain, And having someone inflict it without the chance to fight back is despicable and is sicking to me. to inflict pain without the chance of pain to yourself is cowardly under certain conditions.

No offense to anyone, I just Hate suffering and to inflict it to others without a good reason is just plain wrong.

 

[Vanaron]

I can't tell you how many times I told myself that the next time I saw my ex I would act like the charming, confident and successful man I know I am. But then I'd see her and act like a timid and insecure child she so believes I am...

The point being what you think you would do and what you end up doing in a certain situation are almost never the same, since we tend to underestimate the situation and overestimate our ability to act like rational independent people instead of emotional and easily influenced sheep.

Going against our nature is a tough feat, no matter how much of a unique snowflake you think you are, you're still human and as such susceptible to social pressure.