Milgram gets thrown around as proof that everyone is just a few steps away from being an agent of evil. Finding out that it actually shows that there are psychopaths among us, and most people actually refused (left the experiment), somehow "clicks" and fits with reality a lot better. We see this in historical genocides - not everyone is in on it, and in fact it has to be covered-up internally because only the psychopaths are able to stomach it.
Audio tapes reveal mass rule-breaking in Milgram's obedience experiments
51–60 of 142 posts
Re: Audio tapes reveal mass rule-breaking in Milgram's obedience experiments
#52To be clear, this doesn't seem like it invalidates anything in the original experiment. The "rule-breaking" isn't referring to anything the researchers were doing. It's referring to what the participants were doing. It points out that the compliant subjects who delivered the shocks weren't always following the procedure they were given perfectly. Which is, of course, expected, since people in general don't follow ins…
I do feel like the conclusion is a bit of a stretch, but there is a slight discrepancy where disobedient participants followed the rules more than the obedient ones, which is an interesting observation. It just feels a bit weak.
Re: Audio tapes reveal mass rule-breaking in Milgram's obedience experiments
#53To be clear, this doesn't seem like it invalidates anything in the original experiment. The "rule-breaking" isn't referring to anything the researchers were doing. It's referring to what the participants were doing. It points out that the compliant subjects who delivered the shocks weren't always following the procedure they were given perfectly. Which is, of course, expected, since people in general don't follow ins…
The “complete breakdown” does not refer to the experiment, but the fictional setting of the experiment.
The article doesn’t claim that the experiment was invalidated, but that some conclusions drawn from it are not well founded.
Re: Audio tapes reveal mass rule-breaking in Milgram's obedience experiments
#54Is there any information on how many of the participants realized the victim was just acting? Surely it can’t be zero.
Re: Audio tapes reveal mass rule-breaking in Milgram's obedience experiments
#55Earlier quoted context omitted.
In Dan Ariely's book, "predictably irrational", there's a chapter about how everyone cheats a little. And based on everyone I've met, and on Dan Ariely's own actions (1), I've concluded this one is true. We all cheat a little from time to time. Ex : for me, driving a few km/h above the speed limit is "cheating a little" 1 : https://www.businessinsider.com/dan-ariely-duke-fraud-invest...
The ironic part is the recent fabrication controversy with Ariely. He’s recently had to retract fraudulent papers (one of them, most ironically, on the topic of honesty) because of falsified data. It makes one question the validity of all of his work. His relationship with Jeffrey Epstein isn’t a good look either.
"Irony regards every simple truth as a challenge."
Mason Cooley
Re: Audio tapes reveal mass rule-breaking in Milgram's obedience experiments
#56To be clear, this doesn't seem like it invalidates anything in the original experiment. The "rule-breaking" isn't referring to anything the researchers were doing. It's referring to what the participants were doing. It points out that the compliant subjects who delivered the shocks weren't always following the procedure they were given perfectly. Which is, of course, expected, since people in general don't follow ins…
The “complete breakdown” does not refer to the experiment, but the fictional setting of the experiment. The article doesn’t claim that the experiment was invalidated, but that some conclusions drawn from it are not well founded.
[deleted]
Re: Audio tapes reveal mass rule-breaking in Milgram's obedience experiments
#57Appearance of rule-following is of primary importance, not actual rule-following.
The performance, or signal, or whatever we're calling it. That's the important thing.
Re: Audio tapes reveal mass rule-breaking in Milgram's obedience experiments
#58Milgram gets thrown around as proof that everyone is just a few steps away from being an agent of evil. Finding out that it actually shows that there are psychopaths among us, and most people actually refused (left the experiment), somehow "clicks" and fits with reality a lot better. We see this in historical genocides - not everyone is in on it, and in fact it has to be covered-up internally because only the psychop…
I think you are incorrectly guessing the content of the article based on the title.
The article doesn't say that more people refused than was previously known.
It just concludes that most people weren't following instructions in a way that would have supported the validity of the supposed memory experiment.
Re: Audio tapes reveal mass rule-breaking in Milgram's obedience experiments
#59To be clear, this doesn't seem like it invalidates anything in the original experiment. The "rule-breaking" isn't referring to anything the researchers were doing. It's referring to what the participants were doing. It points out that the compliant subjects who delivered the shocks weren't always following the procedure they were given perfectly. Which is, of course, expected, since people in general don't follow ins…
> It points out that the compliant subjects who delivered the shocks weren't always following the procedure they were given perfectly. Which is, of course, expected, since people in general don't follow instructions 100% perfectly all the time
The article quantifies the amount of rulebreaking. The article actually compares rule breaking across participants and notes that those who were better at obeying the instructions of the experiment are the ones who refused to continue till the end.
The article doesn't invalidate the milgrim experiments. It claims that the interpretation from traditional literature is possibly wrong.
Re: Audio tapes reveal mass rule-breaking in Milgram's obedience experiments
#60This is well-documented in Humankind: A Hopeful History by Rutger Bregman. It's worth a read, as it also dispels other experiments in human behaviour that have subsequently been difficult to replicate (for a variety of reasons).