Understanding the Milgram experiment

• A. Whether people could be trained to memorize long sequences of numbers under stress
• B. How far ordinary people would go in obeying an authority figure who instructed them to harm another person ✓
• C. Whether children learn moral behavior more effectively through punishment than reward
• D. How group size affects individual decision-making in emergency situations

Why: Milgram was motivated largely by questions about obedience to authority, particularly how ordinary people could carry out harmful orders, and he was partly inspired by the Holocaust and the defense of 'just following orders' at the Nuremberg trials.

• A. The Watergate scandal and the abuse of executive power
• B. The Vietnam War protests on American college campuses
• C. The trial of Adolf Eichmann and the Nazi Holocaust ✓
• D. The Cold War arms race between the United States and the Soviet Union

Why: Milgram was deeply influenced by the trial of Adolf Eichmann, a Nazi official who claimed he was merely following orders, and he wanted to test whether ordinary people in a free society would also obey destructive commands.

• A. The learner who received electric shocks
• B. The experimenter who gave the commands
• C. The teacher who administered shocks when the learner answered incorrectly ✓
• D. An observer who recorded the timing of each trial

Why: Participants were assigned the role of 'teacher,' who was told to deliver increasingly strong electric shocks to a 'learner' each time the learner gave a wrong answer. The learner was actually an actor, and no real shocks were delivered.

• A. Most participants refused to continue after the first shock was administered
• B. Participants obeyed in large numbers, with a majority continuing to the maximum shock level in the baseline condition ✓
• C. Women obeyed far less frequently than men across all experimental conditions
• D. Participants became more aggressive the longer the experiment continued

Why: In the baseline study, about 65 percent of participants continued to the highest voltage marked on the shock generator, which surprised Milgram, his colleagues, and many psychologists who had predicted that very few people would go that far.

• A. They proved that obedience is always harmful to society
• B. They suggested that situational pressures, not just personality traits, can drive people to act against their own moral values ✓
• C. They showed that only people with authoritarian personalities would commit cruel acts
• D. They demonstrated that scientific authority is unreliable in laboratory settings

Why: Milgram's central claim was that the social situation, including the presence of a legitimate authority and gradual escalation, can override individual conscience, suggesting that ordinary people can commit harmful acts when situational forces push them to do so.

• A. They were a paid confederate of the experimenter
• B. They were the actual research participant who was unaware of the deception ✓
• C. They were a trained actor playing the role of a learner
• D. They were a research assistant observing the procedure

Why: The 'teacher' was the genuine participant. The 'learner' was a confederate who only pretended to receive shocks, and the participant was deceived into believing the learner was another volunteer.

• A. A genuine volunteer who received real electric shocks
• B. A confederate who pretended to be shocked and gave scripted responses ✓
• C. A supervisor who instructed the teacher to continue
• D. A second researcher who recorded the teacher's responses

Why: The learner was a confederate working with the experimenter. No real shocks were delivered; the learner followed a script of protests and eventual silence to make the participant believe the shocks were real.

• A. The learner, who was trying to persuade the teacher
• B. The experimenter, a authority figure in a lab coat ✓
• C. A randomly selected fellow participant
• D. An automated recording played through speakers

Why: The experimenter delivered a standardized sequence of four prods in a fixed order. Keeping these scripted and consistent was a key feature of the procedure, ensuring every participant received the same pressure.

• A. To make the experiment shorter for participants
• B. To ensure consistency across participants so that differences in behavior could be attributed to the variables being tested ✓
• C. To allow the experimenter to improvise based on each teacher's reactions
• D. Because scripts were required by the university ethics board at the time

Why: Standardization controls extraneous variation. If each experimenter improvised, differences in results could stem from the wording or tone rather than the experimental manipulation, so scripting strengthens the validity of comparisons.

• A. 150 volts, labeled 'Moderate Shock'
• B. 300 volts, labeled 'Danger: Severe Shock'
• C. 450 volts, labeled 'XXX' ✓
• D. 600 volts, labeled 'Lethal Current'

Why: The shock generator ran from 15 to 450 volts in 15-volt increments, with labels progressing from 'Slight Shock' to 'Danger: Severe Shock' and the final switches marked 'XXX'.

• A. To act as a fellow participant who also received shocks
• B. To provide calm, authoritative instructions that encouraged the teacher to continue ✓
• C. To monitor the learner's heart rate and stop the study if needed
• D. To explain the purpose of the study after each trial

Why: The experimenter used scripted prompts such as 'The experiment requires that you continue' to project authority and encourage the participant to keep administering shocks, which was central to the obedience pressure in the study.

• A. A genuine participant who volunteered alongside the teacher
• B. A trained confederate who only pretended to receive shocks ✓
• C. The experimenter's assistant who operated the shock generator
• D. A researcher who observed the session from behind a one-way mirror

Why: The learner was an actor working with the researchers. He never received real shocks, but his scripted protests and screams convinced the real participant, the teacher, that the shocks were causing pain.

• A. About 10 percent
• B. About 25 percent
• C. About 40 percent
• D. About 65 percent ✓

Why: In the baseline condition, roughly 65 percent of participants continued to the maximum 450-volt level, which surprised many observers and highlighted how strongly authority can override personal conscience.

• A. To signal that he was a medical doctor qualified to assess the learner's health
• B. To make the study look like a legitimate scientific setting and enhance perceived authority ✓
• C. To distinguish himself from the participants who wore street clothes for comfort
• D. To protect himself from the electrical equipment used in the shock generator

Why: The grey lab coat was a deliberate symbol of scientific legitimacy. It helped establish the experimenter as a credible authority whose instructions should be followed, a factor Milgram studied as part of the situational pressures.

• A. Obedience rose to nearly 100 percent
• B. Obedience stayed exactly the same as the baseline
• C. Obedience dropped substantially, with many participants secretly reducing the shock levels ✓
• D. Obedience dropped to zero because participants could not hear the learner

Why: When the experimenter was absent and gave instructions by phone, obedience dropped sharply. Many participants lied about the shock levels they had administered, showing that the physical presence of an authority figure was a powerful factor in compliance.

• A. A genuine participant who was also shocked by the machine
• B. A confederate of the experimenter who only pretended to receive shocks ✓
• C. A trained actor who gave the experimenter's instructions to the teacher
• D. A researcher who monitored the teacher's heart rate throughout the study

Why: The learner was a confederate working with Milgram. No real shocks were delivered; the learner's screams and protests were scripted, while the teacher, who was the actual participant, believed the shocks were real.

• A. Roughly 10 percent
• B. Roughly 25 percent
• C. Roughly 40 percent
• D. Roughly 65 percent ✓

Why: In the baseline condition, about 65 percent (26 of 40) of participants continued to the maximum 450-volt level, which was a surprisingly high rate that alarmed many observers.

• A. Please stop immediately, the study is over.
• B. The experiment requires that you continue. ✓
• C. Would you like to take a short break now?
• D. The learner has asked to be released.

Why: The experimenter used a series of scripted prods, the first being 'Please continue' and the most forceful being 'You have no other choice, you must go on.' The phrase 'The experiment requires that you continue' was among the standard prods.

• A. Placing the learner in the same room as the teacher
• B. Having the experimenter leave the room and give orders by phone ✓
• C. Replacing the lab coat with casual clothing for the experimenter
• D. Allowing the teacher to choose the shock level freely

Why: When the experimenter gave instructions by phone rather than being physically present, obedience dropped sharply, with far fewer participants continuing to the highest shock levels. This showed that proximity and direct authority strongly influence compliance.

• A. Participants were mostly sadistic individuals who enjoyed causing pain
• B. Participants were paid so generously that they felt obligated to comply
• C. Situational pressures of authority and the belief that the experimenter bore responsibility ✓
• D. Participants misunderstood that the shocks were fake and thought they were harmless

Why: Milgram concluded that situational factors, particularly the perceived legitimacy of the authority figure and the shift of responsibility onto that authority, drove obedience far more than individual personality traits, a principle he called the 'agentic state.'

• A. To measure how quickly people learn new motor skills under pressure
• B. To investigate the extent to which ordinary people would obey an authority figure who instructed them to harm another person ✓
• C. To test whether memory improves when participants receive electric shocks
• D. To determine whether children imitate adults more often than peers

Why: Milgram wanted to understand how far ordinary individuals would follow orders from an authority figure, even when those orders conflicted with their conscience and caused apparent harm to another person.

• A. Testing the voltage tolerance of different electrical devices
• B. Administering shocks as punishment for wrong answers in a learning study ✓
• C. Calibrating a machine that measured heart rate responses
• D. Rating the comfort level of different shock intensities for future research

Why: Participants, the 'teachers,' were told the study examined whether punishment improves learning, and they delivered shocks for each wrong answer by the learner. The learner was actually an confederate and no real shocks were given.

• A. Because participants were paid far too little for their time
• B. Because it caused significant psychological distress to participants, many of whom were not adequately debriefed or protected from lasting harm ✓
• C. Because the results were never published in any peer-reviewed journal
• D. Because it used animals instead of human subjects

Why: Many participants experienced severe stress, sweating, trembling, and nervous laughter during the study. The experiment raised concerns about deception, informed consent, and the psychological harm inflicted, prompting stricter ethical guidelines for research.

• A. He was a fellow participant who secretly sided with the learner
• B. He was a neutral observer who recorded data without speaking to anyone
• C. He issued standardized verbal prods, such as 'The experiment requires that you continue,' to encourage compliance ✓
• D. He physically restrained participants who wanted to stop

Why: The experimenter applied a series of scripted prompts to keep participants going when they hesitated. These prods were central to the study's design, illustrating how authority can sustain obedience.

• A. Almost no one continued past the moderate shock levels
• B. Obedience was rare and only occurred among participants with prior military experience
• C. A substantial proportion of participants continued to the maximum shock level despite distress ✓
• D. Participants obeyed only when the learner begged them to stop

Why: In the original studies, roughly 65 percent of participants continued to the highest labeled shock level of 450 volts, showing that many people would comply with harmful orders from an authority figure.

• A. About 10%
• B. About 65% ✓
• C. About 85%
• D. About 35%

Why: In Milgram's original study, roughly 65% of participants (26 of 40) continued to the maximum 450-volt level, despite the learner's apparent distress. This finding is the most widely cited result from the series.

• A. Burger (2009) ✓
• B. Haslam and Reicher (2008)
• C. Bocchiaro et al. (2009)
• D. Dambrun and Vatine (2010)

Why: Jerry Burger's 2009 partial replication at Santa Clara University stopped at 150 volts for ethical reasons, but about 70% of participants continued that far, closely matching Milgram's original results. The study was also featured on French television.

• A. The experimenter sitting alongside the participant
• B. Having a second teacher who refused to continue ✓
• C. Moving the experiment to a commercial building
• D. Telling participants the learner was a volunteer

Why: When a confederate posing as a second participant refused to continue, obedience dropped sharply, with only about 10% of participants going to the maximum shock. This showed that visible dissent by peers can strongly undermine authority.

• A. Obedience rates were far higher in all non-Western countries
• B. Obedience rates were broadly similar to the original US findings ✓
• C. Obedience rates were near zero in every country tested
• D. Obedience only appeared among participants who were students

Why: Shanab and Yahya (1977) and later cross-cultural replications, including Smith and Bond's (1998) review, generally found obedience levels comparable to Milgram's American results, though with some variation across countries. This suggested the tendency to obey authority is not confined to one culture.

• A. The funding for the study ran out
• B. Participants refused to proceed past that level
• C. Modern ethical standards prevented going beyond the point where a critical threshold was reached ✓
• D. The equipment could not generate higher voltages

Why: Burger used a screening procedure and stopped at 150 volts, the point at which Milgram's participants had typically first shown strong signs of distress and questioning authority. Contemporary ethics review would not permit exposing participants to the full extreme procedure, so this was a deliberate ethical decision.

• A. To measure how quickly people learn new motor skills under pressure
• B. To investigate how far ordinary people would follow instructions from an authority figure even when those instructions conflicted with their conscience ✓
• C. To test whether memory improves when participants are rewarded with money
• D. To determine whether children imitate aggressive adults on television

Why: Milgram wanted to understand how ordinary people could be drawn into harmful acts when directed by an authority figure, a question partly motivated by reflection on the Holocaust and the defense of 'just following orders.'

• A. The learner who received the electric shocks
• B. The experimenter who supervised the session
• C. The teacher who administered shocks when the learner answered incorrectly ✓
• D. A confederate who secretly recorded the session

Why: The real participant was assigned the role of 'teacher,' while the learner was actually a confederate of the experimenter who only pretended to receive shocks.

• A. Nearly all participants refused to continue after the first shock
• B. Most participants continued to the maximum shock level despite expressing discomfort ✓
• C. Women were far more obedient than men
• D. Participants became more aggressive the longer the experiment lasted

Why: In the baseline condition, roughly 65 percent of participants administered the maximum 450-volt shock, a result that surprised Milgram and many psychologists, who had predicted very few would go so far.

• A. Obedience is always harmful and should be avoided in all situations
• B. People are rarely influenced by the people around them
• C. Situational pressures and authority can lead ordinary people to act against their own values, so it is wise to recognize and question such pressures ✓
• D. Only people with certain personality disorders are capable of cruelty

Why: Milgram's work highlights how situational factors such as legitimate authority, gradual escalation, and diffusion of responsibility can override personal moral judgment, making awareness of these forces a valuable safeguard.

• A. Participants were paid too much money for their involvement
• B. The study caused significant psychological distress and participants were deceived about the real shocks, raising ethical questions about the treatment of subjects ✓
• C. The results could never be replicated under any conditions
• D. The experiment was conducted entirely online without consent

Why: Many participants experienced serious stress, and the deception about the shocks raised ethical issues that helped shape modern research ethics guidelines, such as informed consent and the right to withdraw without penalty.