ANSWERS TO PREVIOUS QUESTIONS
The question through June 2000 was: What does the "37" stand for in Peter Gabriel's song, "We do what we're told-Milgram's 37"?

Answer: It represents the number of fully obedient participants in Experiment 18: A Peer Administers Shocks in Milgram's book, "Obedience to authority: An experimental view" (pp. 121-122). In this variation, the naïve subject did not actually shock the learner-victim-this was done by another participant, who was actually a confederate. The real subject only helped out with the procedure. In other words, the real subjects were only indirectly involved, only accessories, one step removed from actually shocking the victim. Here 37 out of 40 participants continued to the end, the highest obedience rate Milgram found in his whole series. About 20% of the people who tried answering this question got it right.

 
The question for July 2000 was: For his doctoral dissertation, Milgram conducted a cross-cultural study comparing the conformity levels of people in 2 different European countries, using a variation of Asch's procedure. Which 2 countries did Milgram compare? And, who conformed more?

Answer: Milgram compared conformity levels in France and Norway. Norwegians conformed more.

 
The question for October 2000 was: Milgram's program of research on obedience to authority consisted of over 20 experimental variations, which were conducted from August, 1961, through May, 1962. Over a 3-year period, from 1963 to 1965, he published the four journal articles listed below which described in varying detail about half of the experiments in his research program. The rest of the experiments were presented in his book, Obedience to Authority: An Experimental View (1974), which contained a full description of his research program.

However, strictly speaking, the experiment described in one of the 4 journal articles was not an obedience experiment.

Which of the following articles described this experiment? And, in what way was it not an obedience experiment?

a. Behavioral study of obedience, Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1963.
b. Some conditions of obedience and disobedience to authority, Human Relations, 1965.
c. Group pressure and action against a person, Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1964.
d. Liberating effects of group pressure, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1965.

Answer: The answer is C: "Group pressure and action against a person." (Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1964, 69, 137-143). Strictly speaking, this was a conformity experiment and not an obedience experiment, for the following reasons: In this experimental variation, there is a team of three "teachers"; one is the naïve subject and the other two are confederates. The real subject is given the task of actually pressing the shock levers while the two confederates are to carry out the other parts of the "teaching" procedure; i.e., reading the word list, and indicating whether the "learner's" response is right or wrong.

The experimenter tells the teachers that they will decide among themselves the amount of shock the learner is to receive each time he makes an error, such that the lowest level suggested by any member of the triad is the shock that would actually be given. He also tells them that "to keep the experiment running smoothly," with each error the two confederates, in turn, would always state their suggested shock levels first and the real subject would put in his bid last. According to prearranged plan, the two confederates unanimously raise the shock level one step with each subsequent error. Does the naïve subject go along with the fake majority or does he keep the shock at a lower level?

Although the experimenter's general authority hovers in the background, he has left the specific decision about how much "punishment" to give on each trial up to the "teaching team." So, when the naïve subject goes along with the two confederates and raises the shock level, his behavior represents conformity to peer pressure and not obedience to an authority's commands. In other words, he is in an Asch experiment with more serious consequences than judging lengths of lines.

The result: Seven out of 40 participants-17.5%--yielded to group pressure and ended up administering the maximum shock of 450 volts.

 
The question for November/December 2000 was: From September 1970 through November 1971, Milgram, together with Lance Shotland, conducted eight sequential field experiments on television's ability to stimulate antisocial behavior in the viewer. Though conducted about 30 years ago, this research remains unique to the present day. Milgram was able to get the cooperation of one of the TV networks (which also funded the study through a grant) and the writers of a then-popular weekly prime-time TV program to produce a segment tailored specifically to the needs of Milgram's experiment. More specifically, three versions of a particular segment were filmed: two had an antisocial ending-it depicted a main character stealing money; one had a prosocial ending, with the same character making a charitable donation. Viewers saw one of the three versions or a 4th, control, segment and subsequently were provided with an opportunity to steal money (or in some conditions carry out another reprehensible act depicted in the antisocial segments).

Which prime-time TV program did Milgram and Shotland use in this study?

Answer: Medical Center

About 40 people e-mailed me their answers to this question, with 25 of them being correct.

The names of this latter group were entered into a drawing to receive a copy of my new book. The winner was:

Neil Lutsky
Department of Psychology
Carleton College
Northfield, Minnesota
 
The question for January/February 2001 was: Among Milgram's inventive experimental creations was the "Lost Letter Technique." Devised together with his graduate students, Leon Mann and Susan Harter, the technique is meant to serve as an unobtrusive or non-reactive measure of community attitudes. (A non-reactive measure is one that does not modify or distort what is being measured or studied.) In the LLT, stamped letters are "dropped" in various public places-on sidewalks, in phone booths, etc. The proportion of letters that get mailed by finders provides a behavioral indicator of attitudes toward the intended recipient of the letter whose name and P.O. Box address appear on the letter. Over the years, it has become the most widely used non-reactive measure of attitudes. Milgram used the technique on several occasions. One of these was to predict accurately the outcome of an upcoming Presidential election. Which Presidential contest was this?

Answer: Johnson-Goldwater

The correct respondents were entered into a drawing to receive a copy of my new book. The winner was:

Dr. Cheryl Rickabaugh
Chair, Department of Psychology
University of Redlands
Redlands, California
 
The question for March/April 2001 was: Although Milgram's obedience experiments were his most famous work, during his lifetime he conducted other interesting, inventive research. All but one of the following refer to, or are connected to these other studies done by Milgram. Which of the following is NOT associated with him?

Answer: The correct answer: The "even-a-penny-helps" technique. This is a social influence tactic devised by social psychologist Robert Cialdini of Arizona State University.

The correct respondents were entered into a drawing to receive a copy of my new book. The winner was:

Dr. Richard St. Jean
Professor of Psychology
University of Prince Edward Island
Charlottetown, PE
CANADA
 
The question for May/June 2001 was: Identify the source, in Milgram’s writings, of the following quote:

Obedience, as determinant of behavior, is of particular relevance to our time. It has been reliably established that from 1933-1945 millions of innocent persons were systematically slaughtered on command. Gas chambers were built, death camps were guarded, daily quotas of corpses were produced with the same efficiency as the manufacture of appliances. These inhumane policies may have originated in the mind of a single person, but they could only be carried out on a massive scale if a very large number of persons obeyed orders.

Answer: Actually, there are two correct answers. The quote first appeared in the opening paragraph of Milgram's first article about his obedience studies, "Behavioral study of obedience," in the Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 67, 371-378.

Milgram later used the same paragraph, with slight changes in wording, to begin Chapter 1 of his book, Obedience to authority: An experimental view, published in 1974 by Harper & Row. (It was reissued as a paperback by Harper/Collins in 1983 and is still in print.)

 
There were no questions for July through October.

The question for November/December 2001 was: Milgram's obedience experiments revealed something we didn't know before: The unexpectedly high degree of obedience-65% in his first experiment-shown by normal people to destructive orders, even in the absence of coercion. But there is another important finding that sometimes gets overlooked-that the amount of obedience varied as a function of the situation. In fact, across the whole series of over 20 experiments, Milgram found that the proportion of obedient subjects (that is, those who gave the maximum 450 volt shock) ranged from a low of 0% to a high of 92.5%.

Answer: The answer is D: The experimenter says to stop the shocks, but the learner says he wants to continue.

 

Close Window

There was no question for January-February 2002.

The question for March/April 2002 was: Published replications of Milgram's obedience experiments have been conducted in a number of countries besides the U.S. Which of the following is NOT one of the countries?

Answer:  e. Hungary.

Close Window