Replicating Milgram: Would people still obey today?
- PMID: 19209958
- DOI: 10.1037/a0010932
Replicating Milgram: Would people still obey today?
Abstract
The author conducted a partial replication of Stanley Milgram's (1963, 1965, 1974) obedience studies that allowed for useful comparisons with the original investigations while protecting the well-being of participants. Seventy adults participated in a replication of Milgram's Experiment 5 up to the point at which they first heard the learner's verbal protest (150 volts). Because 79% of Milgram's participants who went past this point continued to the end of the shock generator's range, reasonable estimates could be made about what the present participants would have done if allowed to continue. Obedience rates in the 2006 replication were only slightly lower than those Milgram found 45 years earlier. Contrary to expectation, participants who saw a confederate refuse the experimenter's instructions obeyed as often as those who saw no model. Men and women did not differ in their rates of obedience, but there was some evidence that individual differences in empathic concern and desire for control affected participants' responses.
PsycINFO Database Record 2009 APA.
Comment in
-
Milgram, stress research, and the Institutional Review Board.Am Psychol. 2009 Oct;64(7):621-2. doi: 10.1037/a0017110. Am Psychol. 2009. PMID: 19824756 No abstract available.
Similar articles
-
Reflections on "Replicating Milgram" (Burger, 2009).Am Psychol. 2009 Jan;64(1):20-7. doi: 10.1037/a0014407. Am Psychol. 2009. PMID: 19209960 Review.
-
From New Haven to Santa Clara: A historical perspective on the Milgram obedience experiments.Am Psychol. 2009 Jan;64(1):37-45. doi: 10.1037/a0014434. Am Psychol. 2009. PMID: 19209963
-
Obedience lite.Am Psychol. 2009 Jan;64(1):32-6. doi: 10.1037/a0014473. Am Psychol. 2009. PMID: 19209962 Review.
-
The power of the situation: The impact of Milgram's obedience studies on personality and social psychology.Am Psychol. 2009 Jan;64(1):12-9. doi: 10.1037/a0014077. Am Psychol. 2009. PMID: 19209959 Review.
-
Change over time in obedience: The jury's still out, but it might be decreasing.Am Psychol. 2009 Jan;64(1):28-31. doi: 10.1037/a0014475. Am Psychol. 2009. PMID: 19209961 Review.
Cited by
-
Neural Basis of Two Kinds of Social Influence: Obedience and Conformity.Front Hum Neurosci. 2016 Feb 22;10:51. doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2016.00051. eCollection 2016. Front Hum Neurosci. 2016. PMID: 26941632 Free PMC article.
-
Robot Authority in Human-Robot Teaming: Effects of Human-Likeness and Physical Embodiment on Compliance.Front Psychol. 2021 May 31;12:625713. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.625713. eCollection 2021. Front Psychol. 2021. PMID: 34135804 Free PMC article.
-
[Collective violence: neurobiological, psychosocial and sociological condition].Nervenarzt. 2013 Nov;84(11):1345-54, 1356-8. doi: 10.1007/s00115-013-3856-y. Nervenarzt. 2013. PMID: 24009029 Review. German.
-
Using simulation to address hierarchy-related errors in medical practice.Perm J. 2014 Spring;18(2):14-20. doi: 10.7812/TPP/13-124. Perm J. 2014. PMID: 24867545 Free PMC article.
-
Bad machines corrupt good morals.Nat Hum Behav. 2021 Jun;5(6):679-685. doi: 10.1038/s41562-021-01128-2. Epub 2021 Jun 3. Nat Hum Behav. 2021. PMID: 34083752 Review.
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Miscellaneous