Design an experiment to answer  your research question.  
 

If an experiment would be impossible or implausible to answer your research question, describe why.
 

If you studied your research question using an experiment, what risks might people involved in your study incur?  Think about all the potential risks involved in your research.  If you argue that an experiment could not be used to study your question, are there ethical reasons for this conclusion? If so, what are they?

Read the information below about the experiment that Stanley Milgram conducted in the 1960's, as described by John J. Macionis in his 7th edition textbook entitled Sociology (1999):

In Milgram's initial study (1963; 1965; Miller, 1986), a researcher explained to male recruits that they would be participating in a study of how punishment affects learning.  One by one, he assigned the the role of "teacher" and placed another individual -- actually, an accomplice of Milgram's -- in a connecting room as the "learner."

The teacher watched the learner sit down in what appeared to be an electric chair.  As the teacher looked on, the researcher applied electrode paste to the learner's wrist, explaining that this would "prevent blisters and burns," and then attached the electrode.  The researcher explained to the teacher that the leather straps holding the learner were to "prevent excessive movement while the learner was being shocked," and that, although the shocks could be painful, they would cause "no permanent tissue damage."

The researcher then led the teacher back into an adjoining room explaining that the "electric chair" was connected to a "shock generator," actually a bogus but forbidding piece of equipment (a realistic-looking label read "Shock Generator, Type ZLB, Dyson Instrument Company, Waltham, Mass.").  On the front was a dial that supposedly regulated electric current, beginning with 15 volts (labeled "light shock"), escalating gradually to 300 volts (marked "intense shock"), and peaking at 450 volts (marked "Danger Severe Shock" and "XXX").   

Seated in front of the "shock generator," the teacher was told to read aloud pairs of words. Then, the teacher was to repeat the first word of each pair and wait for the learner to recall the second word.  Whenever the learner failed to respond correctly, the teacher was instructed to apply an electric shock from the "shock generator."

The researcher directed the teacher to begin at the lowest level  (15 volts) and to increase the shock by 15 volts every time the learner made a mistake.  And so they did.  At 75, 90, and 105 volts, the teacher heard audible moans from the learner; at 120 volts, shouts of pain, at 270 volts, screams; at 315 volts, pounding on the wall; after that, deadly silence. None of the forty subjects assigned to the role of teacher during the initial research even questioned the procedure before reaching 300 volts, and 26 of the subjects -- almost 2/3's -- went all the way to 450 volts.  These startling results show just how readily ordinary people obey authority figures.

Milgram (1964) then modified his research to see if groups could pressure people to administer electric shocks.  This time, Milgram used a group of three teachers, two of whom were his accomplices.  Each of the three teachers was to suggest a shock level when the learner made an error; it was understood that the group would then administer the lowest of the three suggestions.  This arrangement gave the naive subject the power to deliver a lesser shock regardless of what the others proposed.

The accomplices called for increasing the shock level with each error, putting group pressure on the subject to do the same.  And, in fact, they succeeded: The subjects applied voltages three to four times higher than other subjects in control conditions who acted alone.  Thus Milgram's research suggests that people are likely to follow directions of not only "legitimate authority figures," but also of ordinary individuals, even when the directions involve inflicting harm on another person.

Answer the Following Questions:

 What do you think of the ethics of this experiment? The subject was lied to (deceived) about the purposes of the experiment. Some subjects experienced stress in the course of their participation. Do you think the ends (conducting this research and obtaining important findings -- that ordinary people conform to perceptions of authority) justified the means used by Milgram?

What is your reaction to the individuals who followed orders and appeared to inflict pain upon an unwilling individual?

How do you think people should decide that authority is legitimate and that one should comply with the direction of authority?

When should one refuse to obey orders? Make a list of situations where you think the individual should refuse to be obedient. Make a list of situations where you think the individuals should be obedient even though there are harmful consequences? 

References

Macionis, John J. 1999. Sociology, 7th edition. Prentice Hall.

Milgram, Stanley. 1963. "Behavior Study of Obedience." Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 67(4):371-378.

Milgram, Stanley. 1964. "Group Pressure and Action Against a Person." Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 69(2):137-143.

Milgram, Stanley. 1965. "Some Conditions of Obedience and Disobedience to Authority." Human Relations 18:57-76.

Miller, Arthur G. 1986. The Obedience Experiments: A Case of Controversy in Social Science. Praeger.