Another Pillar Falls: Milgram's Obedience Experiment

[DynamicDidactic]

SAGE Journals: Your gateway to world-class research journals

Subscription and open access journals from SAGE Publishing, the world's leading independent academic publisher.

journals.sagepub.com

Unpublished data from Stanley Milgram's experiments cast doubt on his claims about obedience

An analysis of previously unpublished data raises serious questions about Stanley Milgram's landmark obedience experiments. The findings, which have been

www.psypost.org

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[BuckeyeLove]

major buzzkill for undergrad social psych. from what I remember most, if not all, was spent pontificating on milgram and/or Zimbardo. of course, the latter still seems to be raking it in.

 

[WisNeuro]

Nothing much new here. I actually used to bring this one up with my students when I taught, about how these "psychology myths" persist, despite the original data being seriously flawed and/or misinterpreted. Don't get me started on Zimbardo...

 

[NotTheHoff]

This sounds worse than what actually seems to be the case. First, the post-questionnaire feedback was well after the study, and I would question how much weight we should give those accounts (both intentional and unintentional inaccuracies about what they knew during the study). Second, even participants who reported knowing the shocks were a ruse issued a high level of shocks; "knowledge" of this accounts for like 5% of the variance of shocks between those reporting knowing the ruse vs. not. In essence, it moderated the effect, but the trends remained there (not eliminated).

 

[WisNeuro]

There is more controversy than just this follow-up, some have suggested that Milgram fudged the numbers a bit.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/317914282_Deception_and_Illusion_in_Milgram's_accounts_of_the_Obedience_Experiments

In short, several of our "big" research studies are much less impressive and or/say the same thing as reported once you learn about all of the issues with the research, or undiscussed manipulations by the principal investigator. People should really read about all of the things Zimbardo did when he wasn't getting the results he wanted. Some of these studies were designed to reach a certain outcome, not to investigate a phenomena.

 

[AcronymAllergy]

I'd wondered about how the subjects' perceptions/judgments about their actions might impact their responses on the questionnaire (e.g., "I sure did shock that poor guy a lot. Oh wait, yeah, of course I knew it was fake"). Although admittedly, I haven't looked into much of the newer information that's come out.

Does this mean we all get to go back to hardcore psychophysics labs and start from scratch? I call dibs on re-inventing the tachistocope.

 

[foreverbull]

There is more controversy than just this follow-up, some have suggested that Milgram fudged the numbers a bit.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/317914282_Deception_and_Illusion_in_Milgram's_accounts_of_the_Obedience_Experiments

In short, several of our "big" research studies are much less impressive and or/say the same thing as reported once you learn about all of the issues with the research, or undiscussed manipulations by the principal investigator. People should really read about all of the things Zimbardo did when he wasn't getting the results he wanted. Some of these studies were designed to reach a certain outcome, not to investigate a phenomena.

I lost even more respect for Zimbardo (already wasn’t a fan) when I watched the Stanford Prison Experiment feature film and then looked up whether some of the outrageous details not taught in psychology classes were true (I.e. that the research team played the role of “wardens” and interacted with participants at some points rather than objectively observing the experiment and staying uninvolved after the initial instructions were given). One guard was even coached to be tougher by a researcher/warden at one point, which is recorded in audio and part of the study data Zimbardo released (there’s an interview done by someone from Vox a few years back that calls him out in this and Zimbardo gets really defensive in the transcript). Zimbardo was pushing for a certain result, and there is clear evidence of bias and intervening on the part of researchers to create more of a “prison” environment.

As an aside, my students were horrified to learn that Zimbardo is now a big name in psychology and suffered no negative backlash for conducting the study as he did. I personally believe Zimbardo picked a provocative topic and set-up for fame, and then got what he wanted.

Also, it just blows my mind that it’s one of the fundamental research interpretation mistakes we teach students not to fall prey to early on (to use one small and very flawed study that isn’t even a true experiment and generalize it to the public to say anything about human nature and/or the power of situations, as we know), but Zimbardo still launched his career by doing just that....and our field let him get away with it.

 

[cara susanna]

Not exactly related to the original point, but I always felt like Milgram undeservedly received WAY more flack than Zimbardo did. Zimbardo was far more unethical IMO.

 

[cara susanna]

As an aside, my students were horrified to learn that Zimbardo is now a big name in psychology and suffered no negative backlash for conducting the study as he did. I personally believe Zimbardo picked a provocative topic and set-up for fame, and then got what he wanted.

Also, it just blows my mind that it’s one of the fundamental research interpretation mistakes we teach students not to fall prey to early on (to use one small and very flawed study and generalize it to the public to say anything about human nature and/or the power of situations, as we know), but Zimbardo still launched his career by doing just that....and our field let him get away with it.

I missed this post before responding: YES. I can't stand how he's made a career out of this and how people in the field worship him.

Also, one of his other studies involved people eating a grasshopper. Just saying.

 

[foreverbull]

For anyone interested in dismantling Zimbardo's study (article is long, but worth a read):

The Lifespan of a Lie

The most famous psychology study of all time was a sham. Why can’t we escape the Stanford Prison Experiment?

gen.medium.com