Hi In the original Milgram experiments model of refusal markedly increased quitting in the actual subjects. Less than 10% continued to end? So something different in this replication?
Take care Jim James M. Clark Professor of Psychology 204-786-9757 204-774-4134 Fax [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 03-Jan-07 11:12:05 PM >>> If you didn't see "Primetime" last night, you're going to wish you had. They actually did a *replication* of the Milgram obedience experiment. They used a social psychologist from U. Santa Clara (Berger?) as a consultant and got approval of the procedure from the APA. The only important change seems to have been that they limited the highest shock to 150 volts, rather than 450, arguing that over 80% of people who went to 150 in the original study, which is the point where the "learner" demands to stop and refers to his heart condition, went on to 450. What happened? 70% of the "teachers" gave the "learner" the highest level of shock (67%, I think, in the original). They also did a breakdown of men (n=18) and women (n=22): 65% of men and 73% of women continued on to the highest shock level. They added an interesting twist in some cases, where they used a second confederate as a co-teacher who started the procedure, but then claimed not to be able to continue after a certain point (expecting that this might serve as a moral model for the real subject). The subject was asked to pickup where the confederate had left off, and 63% of those went to the highest shock as well. Plus ¨a change... Regards, Chris -- Christopher D. Green Department of Psychology York University Toronto, ON M3J 1P3 Canada 416-736-5115 ex. 66164 [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.yorku.ca/christo ============================= --- To make changes to your subscription go to: http://acsun.frostburg.edu/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=tips&text_mode=0&lang=english --- To make changes to your subscription go to: http://acsun.frostburg.edu/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=tips&text_mode=0&lang=english
