1. Chapter 7: Conformity
Part 3: Oct. 19, 2011

2. Reasons for Obeying (Milgram)
Normative & informational sources were strong in Milgram’s study
Explains their initial obedience, but why continue to extreme?
1) Conforming to the wrong norm? (obey vs. help others)
Hard to stop following an earlier norm when it becomes inappropriate
Fast-paced experiment & subject had to attend to other details
2) Self-justification
Similar to sequential request strategies:
Small increase in levels of shock as experiment progressed  dissonance
3) Loss of personal responsibility
Just following orders from legitimate authority (experimenter)
Zimbardo’s research on execution teams in prisons
Compared to fellow guards who didn’t execute…more disengagement
Saw them as threat, dehumanized
Dissonance created internal pressure to continue to obey. Each shock laid groundwork for next level

3. Ethics of Milgram’s Experiment
Criticized for many reasons:
Deception – thought shocks were real, they weren’t
No true informed consent – not told of real purpose
Created psychological distress for participants
Right to withdraw – not told of this right; ‘you must continue’
“Inflicted insight” – after the study, some learned things about themselves they hadn’t agreed to beforehand
Milgram’s arguments about benefits of the study
What we learned about human nature offset trauma to participants
Ethical guidelines for experiments in the U.S. created in 1966
Made obedience studies problematic; not done again until 2006

4. Updates on Milgram
Burger’s (2009) experiment: replicated basic procedure
Similarity to Milgram:
Same ‘prods’ to order participants to continue
Adult participants recruited through ads (average age in 40s)
Differences from Milgram’s original study:
Reduced distress by stopping study after 150 volts
When disobedience occurred for Milgram, it was by 150 v
Participants prescreened by clinical psychologist to exclude some
Those w >2 college courses were excluded (awareness)
Participants were repeatedly told they could leave at any time
Results?
No signif differences in obedience rate from Milgram up to max level of shock
70% obeyed and would have continued…
Much had changed in the country since Milgram…would likelihood of being obedient change?

5. Are people evil & ready to inflict pain w/any excuse?
Migram’s follow-up: ‘choose any level of shock you want’
Only 2.5% voluntarily chose max voltage
Reeder & Pryor’s analysis this: social pressures combined w/situation to create obedience rate
Most people make the FAE when reading Milgram’s studies
We assume the participants were evil (internal attribution) and overlook the situational influences.

6. Application: Cult Behavior and the Jonestown Massacre
1978 mass suicide at “Jonestown”
People’s Temple with Jim Jones as leader moved from SF to S. American jungle.
910 people killed themselves on Jones’ command
Many explanations focus on Jones’ charisma.
But, situational explanations too:
Jones used ‘foot-in-the-door’
Required to give 10% income  then 25%  then everything
Removed them from social support
In remote location, foreign county
Set up ingroup/outgroup distinctions