Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2006 Dec 20;1(1):e39.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0000039.

A virtual reprise of the Stanley Milgram obedience experiments

Affiliations

A virtual reprise of the Stanley Milgram obedience experiments

Mel Slater et al. PLoS One. .

Abstract

Background: Stanley Milgram's 1960s experimental findings that people would administer apparently lethal electric shocks to a stranger at the behest of an authority figure remain critical for understanding obedience. Yet, due to the ethical controversy that his experiments ignited, it is nowadays impossible to carry out direct experimental studies in this area. In the study reported in this paper, we have used a similar paradigm to the one used by Milgram within an immersive virtual environment. Our objective has not been the study of obedience in itself, but of the extent to which participants would respond to such an extreme social situation as if it were real in spite of their knowledge that no real events were taking place.

Methodology: Following the style of the original experiments, the participants were invited to administer a series of word association memory tests to the (female) virtual human representing the stranger. When she gave an incorrect answer, the participants were instructed to administer an 'electric shock' to her, increasing the voltage each time. She responded with increasing discomfort and protests, eventually demanding termination of the experiment. Of the 34 participants, 23 saw and heard the virtual human, and 11 communicated with her only through a text interface.

Conclusions: Our results show that in spite of the fact that all participants knew for sure that neither the stranger nor the shocks were real, the participants who saw and heard her tended to respond to the situation at the subjective, behavioural and physiological levels as if it were real. This result reopens the door to direct empirical studies of obedience and related extreme social situations, an area of research that is otherwise not open to experimental study for ethical reasons, through the employment of virtual environments.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1. The Experimental Scenario.
a,The participant in the Cave is seated behind a desk that contains the electric shock machine. The experimenter is seated to the participant's right. The virtual character (Learner) appears to be on the other side of a partition and seen through a window. The cue word and four possible associated words are displayed with the correct associated word shown in capitals. After the participant reads out the five words the Learner answers with one of the four possible answers. If the answer is incorrect the participant turns up a voltage dial on the shock machine b, and then presses a button to administer the shock. For the HC condition the window area where the Learner is displayed is covered, and the Learner's answer appears in text underneath the cue word and possible answers.
Figure 2
Figure 2. Skin conductance waveform average around the shock times.
a, Event triggered average of 20 s segments of skin conductance waveform, the events being the times when the button that gave an electric shock to the virtual character was pressed. The grand mean was calculated over each shock and each person and the result for the VC is shown here (n = 439*). Each waveform was adjusted by subtracting the corresponding individual's mean SCL during the baseline period. For each participant a number of pseudo random shock times distributed over the learning period, equal to the actual number for that person, were generated – also with the adjustment for the individual's mean baseline SCL. An average curve was formed like this 500 times, and these are shown as the many overlapping thinner curves. A histogram of the values of these pseudo random curves at the 0 time point is shown inset. b, shows the event triggered means of skin conductance waveforms for the VC (black line) and the HC (grey line), but where each segment is translated to start at zero, so that both mean curves start at the same point for comparison purposes. The additional curves shown are 95% normal (non-simultaneous) confidence intervals. *The time of one administered shock was lost.
Figure 3
Figure 3. Significance Levels for differences between the SCLs for the VC and HC by shock number.
For each shock the SCL (adjusted by subtracting the mean baseline value) at the time that the shock is administered is found for each of the n = 23 in the VC and n = 11 in the HC. A rank sum test is used to test the hypothesis that these are drawn from the same population. The vertical axis shows the significance level for rejection of the null hypothesis. By examination of the medians of the samples in each case it is clear that for the later shocks the null hypothesis would be rejected in favour of the alternative that the SCL is higher for the VC.
Figure 4
Figure 4. Times between asking the question and indicating the intention to shock.
The vertical axis is the time between the participant finishing reading out the 5 words forming the question and saying “Incorrect” after the Learner did not respond, at questions 28 and 29 (the last two). The horizontal axis labels refer to the question number and the condition VC or HC. The plots are standard box plots, where the box shows the median and interquartile range, and the whiskers extend to 1.5 times the interquartile range. Values outside the whiskers are outliers, the single outlier shown as a cross. At the 28th question the time difference ranged from 8 s to 78 s with a median of 23 s for the VC (n = 19) and from 4 s to 13 s with a median of 7 s for those in the HC (n = 11). The Wilcoxon rank sum test rejects the hypothesis that the two samples are from the same population with P = 4.4×10−4. At the time of the 29th (and last) question the equivalent results are: 5–43 s with a median of 13 s for the VC (n = 16), and 5–14 s with a median of 8 s for the HC (n = 11). Here the difference is significant with P = 0.0175.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Milgram S. Behavioral study of obedience. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology. 1963;67:371–378. - PubMed
    1. Milgram S. Obedience to Authority: McGraw-Hill; 1974.
    1. Fiske ST, Harris LT, Cuddy AJC. Why ordinary people torture enemy prisoners. Science. 2004;306:1482–1483. - PubMed
    1. Atran S. Genesis of suicide terrorism. Science. 2003;299:1534–1539. - PubMed
    1. Baumrind D. Some thoughts on the ethics of research: After reading Milgram's “behavioral study of obedience”. American Psychologist. 1964;19:421–423.

Personal name as subject