NYTimes
[...] The Milgram experiment’s startling result — as anyone who has taken a college psychology course knows — was that ordinary people were willing to administer a lot of pain to innocent strangers if an authority figure instructed them to do so. More than 80 percent of participants continued after administering the 150-volt shock, and 65 percent went all the way up to 450 volts.
Jerry Burger of Santa Clara University replicated the experiment and has now published his findings in American Psychologist. He made one slight change in the protocol, in deference to ethical standards developed since 1963. He stopped when a participant believed he had administered a 150-volt shock. (He also screened out people familiar with the original experiment.)
Professor Burger’s results were nearly identical to Professor Milgram’s. Seventy percent of his participants administered the 150-volt shock and had to be stopped. That is less than in the original experiment, but not enough to be significant.
Much has changed since 1963. The civil rights and antiwar movements taught Americans to question authority. Institutions that were once accorded great deference — including the government and the military — are now eyed warily. Yet it appears that ordinary Americans are about as willing to blindly follow orders to inflict pain on an innocent stranger as they were four decades ago.
Professor Burger was not surprised. He believes that the mindset of the individual participant — including cultural influences — is less important than the “situational features” that Professor Milgram shrewdly built into his experiment. These include having the authority figure take responsibility for the decision to administer the shock, and having the participant increase the voltage gradually. It is hard to say no to administering a 195-volt shock when you have just given a 180-volt shock.
The results of both experiments pose a challenge. If this is how most people behave, how do we prevent more Holocausts, Abu Ghraibs and other examples of wanton cruelty? Part of the answer, Professor Burger argues, is teaching people about the experiment so they will know to be on guard against these tendencies, in themselves and others.[...]
[...] The Milgram experiment’s startling result — as anyone who has taken a college psychology course knows — was that ordinary people were willing to administer a lot of pain to innocent strangers if an authority figure instructed them to do so. More than 80 percent of participants continued after administering the 150-volt shock, and 65 percent went all the way up to 450 volts.
Jerry Burger of Santa Clara University replicated the experiment and has now published his findings in American Psychologist. He made one slight change in the protocol, in deference to ethical standards developed since 1963. He stopped when a participant believed he had administered a 150-volt shock. (He also screened out people familiar with the original experiment.)
Professor Burger’s results were nearly identical to Professor Milgram’s. Seventy percent of his participants administered the 150-volt shock and had to be stopped. That is less than in the original experiment, but not enough to be significant.
Much has changed since 1963. The civil rights and antiwar movements taught Americans to question authority. Institutions that were once accorded great deference — including the government and the military — are now eyed warily. Yet it appears that ordinary Americans are about as willing to blindly follow orders to inflict pain on an innocent stranger as they were four decades ago.
Professor Burger was not surprised. He believes that the mindset of the individual participant — including cultural influences — is less important than the “situational features” that Professor Milgram shrewdly built into his experiment. These include having the authority figure take responsibility for the decision to administer the shock, and having the participant increase the voltage gradually. It is hard to say no to administering a 195-volt shock when you have just given a 180-volt shock.
The results of both experiments pose a challenge. If this is how most people behave, how do we prevent more Holocausts, Abu Ghraibs and other examples of wanton cruelty? Part of the answer, Professor Burger argues, is teaching people about the experiment so they will know to be on guard against these tendencies, in themselves and others.[...]
Back in HS in the 70s, R' Chaim Ozer Chait took us to the lab and had us experimentally measure yad soledes bo. We heated beakers of water to see how much heat a hand could tolerate.
ReplyDeleteOur results were around 130-135 degF when reflex kicks in. Vindicating R' Moshe, IIRC.
However, if you put your hand in before the water gets hot, and leave it there while it heats, the result is more than 25 degF higher. (It varied a lot by person.)
Dr Burger's explanation sounds similar.
-micha
micha said...
ReplyDeleteBack in HS in the 70s, R' Chaim Ozer Chait took us to the lab and had us experimentally measure yad soledes bo. We heated beakers of water to see how much heat a hand could tolerate.
Our results were around 130-135 degF when reflex kicks in. Vindicating R' Moshe, IIRC.
However, if you put your hand in before the water gets hot, and leave it there while it heats, the result is more than 25 degF higher. (It varied a lot by person.)
================
The same seems to be regarding abuse - if you are in the situation then it is not as much a stretch to tolerate them then if you are an outsider. That is why outside observers are puzzled why people stay in abusive relationships. They usually don't start off as abusive. If they did they would not last long.
The same goes about believing stories about sexual abuse:
ReplyDeleteIf you like the alleged offender, you will not believe it. If the alleged offender is indifferent to you, you will believe the victim.
That's why, if sexual abuse happens within the family, it is better to reveal it first to outsiders, and to get some support from outside the family before revealing it to the "inner circle".