Review Paper Presentation

3,639 views

Published on

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
3,639
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
3
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
35
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • What made me decide to do this paper was my fascination with the Stanford Prison experiment, Stanley Milgram’s shock experiment, and more recently the events at Abu Ghraib. All events had people who were seen as average nice people but were given power or were told by an authority to do what could be seen as evil acts. What would you do in the same situation? Stay true to yourself or begin to do evil things?
  • Philip Zimbardo’s famous Stanford Prison experiment is well known in the psychology community and will never be fully replicated again due to the ethical issues that came from it. In Zimbardo’s book The Lucifer Effect (2007) he discusses just what my overall paper is about, good people who do evil things and the possible reasons why. Researching the Stanford prison experiment, Milgram’s shock experiment, and Abu Ghraib gave me a better idea of what types of influences cause normally good people to act out in an evil manner. It came down to those people being put into a power situation or the power of authority; some people argue that all people have the ability to make decisions even when pressured by a higher authority. What do you think, is it possible to break through that feeling of power and maintain the good side of you or is temptation to hard to resist?
  • This reference by Begley (2009) looks into what makes some of us saints and some of us sinners. This paper looks into the Stanley Milgram shock experiment; this experiment had seemingly ordinary people be told by an authority (experimenter) to shock a stranger. Because of the authority figure most participants complied and shocked the stranger when told to do so, along with increasing the shock’s voltage. Fortunately the shock that was given was not real but the participants didn’t know this going into the experiment. Strengths of this article were that it showed that ordinary people can be influenced into doing just about anything considering they shocked a complete stranger with a high level of electricity.
  • Collins (2000) demonstrates an experiment that was done in recent years to show the similarities in the Stanford Prison experiment and the impact of low and high power roles can have on the behavior of men and women. This paper was helpful in backing up what was done with the Stanford Prison experiment by looking at more recent activity of both men and women when given low and high power roles.
  • Danchev (2008) discusses how the events at Abu Ghraib have had quite an impact on our society, this article was helpful with explaining what happened at Abu Ghraib. Overall the events that happened there were horrific and unimaginable. It’s hard to believe that ordinary good men and women were capable of doing such things to others, but it shows that the power of authority is sometimes hard to escape. But at the same time could any of them just said no? One man was able to come out and say no and in turn became the hero in this situation.
  • This article from Discover (2007) asks the question, “Think you’re above doing evil? Think again.” It really makes you think if you were put into a similar situation as those at Abu Ghraib or the participants in the Stanford Prison Experiment, would you be able to stop yourself from doing evil things or would the power role or power of authority be too much? This article does a great job of drawing comparisons between Abu Ghraib and the Stanford Prison experiment.
  • Einolf (2009) reviews four books that look into the events at Abu Ghraib, these four books include; The Trials at Abu Ghraib, The Lucifer Effect, Torture and the Twilight of Empire, and Torture and Democracy. Einolf stated that people who could be potentially in the situation to do evil things upon others should be formally trained so events like the ones at Abu Ghraib can be prevented.
  • Finkelstein (2009) is arguing that everyone is capable of making judgment calls on whether or not to take part in evil acts, even if under the pressure of an authority or are put into a power situation. He touches on a case that involves a man named John Demjanjuk or more commonly known as Ivan the Terrible. John’s defense is saying that John was forced by higher authorities into being bad, was he so influenced that he had to do what he was told or did have a choice? Finkelstein also looks at Milgram’s shock experiment and Zimbardo’s study.
  • Shermer (2007) discusses bad apples and bad barrels, saying that it is not the apple it is the barrel the apple is in. Meaning that an ordinary person is influenced by their surroundings making them act out. He also says that all humans have an evil side and a good side, but I believe that some people’s evil side may never come out which is probably for the better.
  • Wallis et al (2004) looks into the Stanford prison experiment, Abu Ghraib, and Milgram’s shock experiment. This article goes in depth about people being influenced by authorities or are given power they have never had before; so like in the Stanford prison experiment the participants of were given the role of a prison guard had never had that type of power before which is why it went out of control.
  • Zimbardo (2007) the creator and experimenter behind the Stanford Prison Experiment revisits the events that occurred. He discusses good apples in bad barrels and bad barrel makers. Zimbardo has spent a majority of his life researching just why it is that good people can be brought to do evil things.
  • Zimbardo’s 2007 book called The Lucifer Effect, was extremely compelling and was able to explain how and why all people are susceptible to the lure of the “dark side”. He thoroughly explains his own experiment as well as the events at Abu Ghraib, I felt as if this was my strongest reference while doing my research on what makes good people do evil things?
  • This is a look into the articles and which ones support each other and which ones contrast from each other. Overall many psychologists believe that ordinary good people are influenced by higher authorities or power situations, which cause them to do evil acts. Most people that participate in those evil acts are surprised by themselves and question why they were so influenced.
  • In order to further research questions need to be asked, one that could be asked is what type of authority is needed in order to make an average person do bad things? A police officer, a scientist, teacher, etc. This question may bring to light what authorities are seen as having more power and how much influence it really takes to have a good person do evil things. Another question that could be asked is what type of people are more likely to fall into doing evil things, a confident person, shy person, etc? I wonder if the people who participated in the events at Abu Ghraib, the Stanford Prison Experiment, and Milgram’s experiment thought that they were capable of doing such things. I feel as if these questions could help further the research that is currently happening.
  • The research question, what makes good people do evil things? Goes right along with the resources that I have found because the resources give an inside look and possible reasons why ordinary people do evil things. Among the resources psychologists and researchers agree that ordinary people are influenced into evil by either power situations or powerful authority. One skeptic says that people are fully capable of making moral choices and a power situation or a powerful authority is no excuse.
  • The events at Abu Ghraib put into perspective that all people are capable of being evil even if they don’t believe that they can be. The horrific acts at Abu Ghraib were committed by people who were seen as ordinary prior to the events. It is unfortunate and somewhat scary that people are capable of doing such things when influenced by authority.
  • Zimbardo’s Stanford Prison experiment showcases that even ordinary college students are capable of being influenced by power situations. In the experiment a select amount of college students were given the role of being a prison guard and some were given the role of being the prisoner, within days the “guards” were treating the “prisoners” badly and unfairly bringing the “prisoners” close to insanity. The experiment got out of control and had to be stopped, this shows that a power situation can cause “ordinary” people to act out.
  • Milgram’s experiment is a perfect example of ordinary people doing evil things when influenced by an authority or in this case an experimenter. The participants were told that they were to give a complete stranger an electrical shock if that person gave a wrong answer to a question, and to increase the voltage with each wrong answer. Though the participant could hear the stranger crying in pain most continued with the shocks because they were told to do so by a higher authority. Fortunately some participants opted out and didn’t want to continue on with hurting the stranger.
  • Overall this research paper shows that being put into a power situation or being influenced by an authority can bring ordinary people to do horrific things to others. Unfortunately this will never change and people will continue to act out if put into a wrong situation.
  • Review Paper Presentation

    1. 1. Review Paper by: Nicole Whitcomb Advanced General Psychology December 2010
    2. 2. <ul><li>Many have heard of the Stanford Prison Experiment from the 70’s, Milgram’s shock experiment, and the more recent the events at Abu Ghraib. Within all of these events seemingly average “good” people were influenced into taking part in evil acts. Putting people into power situations or being put into a situation where they are influenced by authority can cause a person to act out in evil ways. Some agree with this statement and some disagree saying that all people are fully capable of making decisions for themselves and power situations are no excuse. </li></ul>
    3. 3. <ul><li>What makes good people turn bad or do bad things? When seemingly average good people do unthinkable acts this question comes up. This question has been researched by many psychologists and researchers; in particular Philip Zimbardo and Stanley Milgram. In Philip Zimbardo’s book The Lucifer Effect (2007) he discusses his Stanford Prison Experiment in the 70’s that demonstrated good people doing bad things because they were put into a power situation. Zimbardo (2007) also discusses the more recent events at Abu Ghraib which is believed to have been influenced by authorities. This brings me to the prevailing argument which is that good average people do bad things because they are put into situations where they are either influenced by authority (people of power) or are put into a power role. The other side of the argument from skeptics is that good average people are fully capable of choosing whether or not to partake in “evil” acts, they may be under the influence of a power trip or a person of power but that is no excuse. My hypothesis is that when ordinary good people are put into either a power situation or situation where they are influenced by authorities they will often times go bad or do bad things. </li></ul><ul><li>  The objective of this paper is to bring to light the problem of good people turning evil, in order to do this I will research the work of Philip Zimbardo and others. This also includes looking at the Stanford Prison Experiment and the events at Abu Ghraib in Iraq. Along with the works of Zimbardo Stanley Milgram’s shock experiment will be examined as well. </li></ul>
    4. 4. <ul><li>Begley, S. (2009). Adventures in Good and Evil. Newsweek , 153 (18), 46-48. Retrieved from Academic Search Elite database: http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=afh&AN=38505821&site=ehost-live </li></ul><ul><li>Begley (2009) discusses what makes some of us saints and some of us sinners; this article brings to light Stanley Milgram’s experiment with recruiting ordinary people to give an electric shock to a complete stranger as instructed by a professional. This article shows that authoritative figures can persuade ordinary good people to do evil things, it goes into talk about how some cope with these types of situations by either caving or standing up for how they feel and what’s right; virtues and vices, (Begley, 2009). This article will bring to the topic at hand another experiment that shows people under the influence of a higher authority and how it makes them act out in ways they may have never imagined. This article will contribute to my paper by giving more examples of good going evil. The strengths of this article is that it gives many examples to back up its reasoning, it also gives examples of ordinary nice people not being influenced by the hand of power and saying no and come out as a hero. This article doesn’t seem to have any weaknesses because it shows both the side where people turn evil in power situations and also shows people staying good. </li></ul>
    5. 5. <ul><li>Collins, L. (2000). Creating Gender Role Behavior: Demonstrating the Impact of Power Differentials. Teaching of Psychology , 27 (1), 37-40. Retrieved from Academic Search Elite database: http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=afh&AN=3348732&site=ehost-live </li></ul><ul><li>This article by Collins (2000) demonstrates a study that was done in order to show parallels between the Zimbardo prison experiment and the impact that assignment to low and high power roles can have on the behavior of men and women. This article will contribute to backing up the topic at hand by showing a recent study, within the last 10 years, done on the effects of power differentials, (Collins, 2000). The strength of this article is that it demonstrates its own study done on college participants on the effects of a dominant figure on a subordinate, (Collins, 2000). This articles weakness is that it doesn’t give an opposing view which would better back up the experiment that was done. </li></ul>
    6. 6. <ul><li>Danchev, A. (2008). Bad apples, dead souls: understanding Abu Ghraib. International Affairs , 84 (6), 1271-1280. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2346.2008.00768.x. Retrieved from Academic Search Elite database: http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=afh&AN=34828455&site=ehost-live </li></ul><ul><li>Danchev (2008) does a review of the events at Abu Ghraib in order to better understand what went on. He discusses how the events at Abu Ghraib are “seeping” into mainstream media, so it is making quite the impact in our society. This article will contribute by helping to better understand the events that happened at Abu Ghraib and how they are affecting society today. The strength of this article is that it gives the reader a good idea of the events at Abu Ghraib and the effects of what happened. I don’t see any weaknesses of this article it explains a lot and was very informative. </li></ul>
    7. 7. <ul><li>Discover (2007). Think you're above doing evil? Think again. Discover , 28 (4), 68-69. Retrieved from Academic Search Elite database: http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=afh&AN=24413957&site=ehost-live </li></ul><ul><li>This article by Discover (2007), discusses Philip Zimbardo’s Stanford Prison Experiment, the Stanford prison experiment was conducted in August of 1971 and included a group of normal average students; some were given the role of a prisoner and the rest were given the role of a prison guard, (Discover, 2007). The article went on to discuss the events at Abu Ghraib in May 2004, where a group of what seemed to be normal American men and women did unimaginable acts to the prisoners they were supposed to be guarding, Discovery (2007). The article draws comparisons from the two events and helps to better explain how good people go evil; it will greatly contribute to the topic at hand by giving real world examples. The strength of this article is that is breaks down the events that happened during the Stanford Prison Experiment and at Abu Ghraib, it shows how and the possible reasons why these seemingly ordinary people turned evil. I don’t see any weaknesses with this article, it gives the facts of what happened during the two events, it draws comparisons between the two events, and it gives reasoning behind why these people may have gone “wrong.” </li></ul>
    8. 8. <ul><li>Einolf, C. (2009). Explaining Abu Ghraib: A Review Essay. Journal of Human Rights , 8 (1), 110-120. Retrieved from Academic Search Elite database: http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=afh&AN=37154362&site=ehost-live </li></ul><ul><li>Einolf (2009) does a review of Abu Ghraib along with a review of four books that correlate or have to do with the events at Abu Ghraib; The Trials at Abu Ghraib, The Lucifer Effect, Torture and the Twilight of Empire, and Torture and Democracy. This article looks closely at how people should be formally trained instead of being influenced to take part in acts that are seen as evil or morally wrong, (Einolf, 2009). This will contribute to the proposed topic because it gives a review of four pieces of work that have to do with the topic at hand, it will help to back up what is being hypothesized. One strength of this article is that looks at the works of four books that were written by social scientists and are reviewed, these are strong resources and help to back up Einolf’s overall review of Abu Ghraib. There are not any weaknesses that I can see in this article, because overall it gives a strong argument. </li></ul>
    9. 9. <ul><li>Finkelstein, D.  (2009, December 2). Never, ever, believe that Demjanjuk is a ‘victim’: Some people claim that decent human beings can behave in an evil way just to conform. It is a pernicious argument.  The Times . Retrieved November 7, 2010, from ProQuest Newsstand: http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?did=1913121951&sid=1&Fmt=3&clientId=82498&RQT=309&VName=PQD </li></ul><ul><li>Finkelstein (2009) discusses that criminal acts can not be excused just because a good ordinary person was pressured into doing so. Finkelstein (2009) argues that everyone has the ability to judge whether or not to be good or bad, every ordinary person has morals. He also discusses John Demjanjuk, also known as Ivan the Terrible, who is on trial for committing Nazi crimes; his defense is saying that John is a victim himself because he was forced by higher authorities, (Finkelstein, 2009). He goes onto talk about the Milgram study and the Stanford Prison Experiment. This will contribute to the proposed topic because it looks at the other side of the issue, someone who doesn’t believe that good people turn bad just because of higher influences or a power trip. The strength of this article is that it brings in a story that isn’t discussed in any of the other articles I obtained, the John Demjanjuk case is one that I would have never thought of. Another strength is that he brings in Milgram’s study and Zimbardo’s study and discusses those briefly. One weakness of the article is that a little more information on Demjanjuk would have been nice, I had to do a little research on the internet to figure out what Demjanjuk was being accused of. </li></ul>
    10. 10. <ul><li>Shermer, M. (2007, August). Bad Apples and Bad Barrels. Scientific American , pp. 34-36. Retrieved from Academic Search Elite database: http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=afh&AN=25637969&site=ehost-live </li></ul><ul><li>Shermer (2007) is a skeptic of the “bad barrel” as explained by Zimbardo. Shermer (2007) discusses the fact that ordinary people are more likely to obey an upper authority due to the fact that they are ordinary and don’t rebel against a higher up. Shermer (2007) briefly discusses that all humans have an evil side and a good side. The strength of this article is that it shows both sides of the argument; both the agreeable side saying that it’s not the apple it the barrel the apple is in and the opposing side which is the skeptic. The weakness of this article is that it doesn’t give much evidence backing up its skepticism. This will contribute to the proposed issue by giving a brief look at what a skeptic has to say about the work of Zimbardo and his beliefs. </li></ul>
    11. 11. <ul><li>Wallis, C., August, M., Bacon Jr., P., Billips, M., Crittle, S., Rawe, J., et al. (2004). WHY DID THEY DO IT?. Time , 163 (20), 38-42. Retrieved from Academic Search Elite database: http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=afh&AN=13051191&site=ehost-live </li></ul><ul><li>Wallis, August, Bacon, Billips, Crittle, Rawe, et al, (2004) give an inside look at the events that occurred at Abu Ghraib, which include the “bad apples” in question which in this case are the soldiers that committed the acts of torment to the Iraqi prisoners. It also briefly discusses both Milgram and Zimbardo’s studies on what happens in situations where people are being influenced by authorities or when people are given power that they may have never had, (Wallis, 2004). This will contribute to the topic of good people going evil by because it asks the question and discusses those who commit these horrible acts a few bad apples or are they just like the rest of us, (Wallis, 2004). The strength of this article is that it goes into the lives of those who were apart of the events at Abu Ghraib, it shows us that they seemed to be ordinary people and when put into a situation where they were being given instructions they took a role in the heinous acts at Abu Ghraib. I don’t see any weaknesses in this article because it shows that the people involved seemed like ordinary good people and then it goes into supporting there view by discussing Milgram’s study of electric shock and Zimbardo’s Stanford Prison Experiment. </li></ul>
    12. 12. <ul><li>Zimbardo, P. (2007). Revisiting the Stanford Prison Experiment: a Lesson in the Power of Situation. Chronicle of Higher Education , 53 (30), B6-B7. Retrieved from Academic Search Elite database: http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=afh&AN=25307670&site=ehost-live </li></ul><ul><li>Zimbardo (2007) revisits the experiment he conducted in the 70’s, which is commonly known as the Stanford Prison Experiment. He explained how the study was conducted and how the study only lasted six days before it was terminated due to the fact that the experiment had gotten out of hand because the made up prison began to seem like a real prison, (Zimbardo, 2007). He goes on to discuss good apples in bad barrels and bad barrel makers, the power that good people are given can bring them to be evil, (Zimbardo, 2007). This will greatly aid my research because we are going right to the source, the man who conducted the infamous experiment almost 40 years ago. The strengths of this article are that it summarizes what happened during the experiment from the experimenter himself and it shows the study’s current relevance in society today. I don’t see any weaknesses in this article because it is a review of the Stanford Prison Experiment and it did just that review. </li></ul>
    13. 13. <ul><li>Zimbardo, P. (2007). The Lucifer Effect: Understanding How Good People Turn Evil. New York: Random House Trade Paperback. </li></ul><ul><li>The Lucifer Effect by Philip Zimbardo (2007) is a book devoted to trying to reason why good people do bad things; Zimbardo explains how and why we are all susceptible to the lure of the “dark side.” Zimbardo (2007) looks into his renowned Stanford Prison Experiment, the events at Abu Ghraib, and other times when ordinary good people did bad things. This book will contribute greatly to the problem of good people do bad things because it is a thorough look into the events that show good people going bad and try to put reasoning behind it. The contribution that it will make to the research is the strength that this book has along with the professional writings of Zimbardo who is a well known social psychologist. There are no weaknesses in this book as far as I’m concerned because as I mentioned before this is a thorough review of the topic at hand. </li></ul><ul><li>  </li></ul>
    14. 14. <ul><li>Begley’s (2009) article tries to explain why good people do bad things; it asks what makes some of us saints and some of us sinners? Collins’s (2000) article also tries to explain why good people do bad things by demonstrating its own experiment done in order to show the impact of power differentials. Danchev’s (2008) article reviews the events at Abu Ghraib trying to better understand why good people do evil things, looks into the disturbing acts that humans can be a part of. Discover’s article puts into perspective the fact that all people are capable of doing evil even when they don’t think they are, this is a supporting article. Einolf’s (2009) article reviews four books trying ot better understand why good people do evil things, whether being influenced by authorities or having a power trip. Shermer’s (2007) articles looks into the Stanford prison experiment and Abu Ghraib, trying to make sense of why good people turn evil. Wallis’s (2004) article discusses whether the people who took part in the Abu Ghraib events are a few bad apples or are they just like the rest of us. Zimbardo’s (2007) review of the Stanford Prison experiment and his book called The Lucifer Effect (2007) looks into the power that people can be sucked into and it can become out of control; along with the influence higher ups can put on ordinary people to do bad things. The articles listed above all support one another by looking into why good people do bad things, they look into the possibility being that they are influenced to things they may have never imagined or are put into a power situation that makes them act out in evil/bad ways. The article that contrasts from the rest is Finkelstein’s article which thinks that people have there own moral reasoning and are very capable of not taking part in horrible acts, in other words there is no excuse. </li></ul><ul><li>So far the evidence from these articles are telling us that many psychologists or people in general believe that ordinary good people are influenced by outer forces; such as authorities or being put into a power situation, which in turn brings them to take part in disturbing acts that they thought they would never take part in. The evidence backing this up is overwhelming, why else would ordinary good people all of a sudden do these criminal acts? </li></ul>
    15. 15. <ul><li>One research question that could be asked in order to further develop this area of study is, what amount of influence and what type of authority is needed in order to make an average person do bad things? I feel as if this question is important because it would bring to light a better understanding of why good people go bad; does it take a lot of influence in order to make a person act out of character or is it just that easy to make a person act out? I believe that it would add to the research already done. Another research question would be, what type of person is more influenced into doing terrible acts, are they shy, confident, sympathetic, etc? This question is important because it makes it more clear what type of people are likely to be bad in power situations/under the influence of an authority and what type of people are likely to become heroes in the same situations. As with the events at Abu Ghraib some of those soldiers became evil while one or two became heroes (Zimbardo, 2007). Do those people who took part in the events at Abu Ghraib, the Stanford Prison Experiment, and Milgram’s experiment feel as if prior to those events that they were capable of such acts? This question is important to the current work being done because this would help answer whether these ordinary good people were already in the mind set that they could act out in such a way, thus making them more probable to be easily influenced. This is compared to those who felt as if they would never act out in such a way. These research questions would help to better understand the finer details of why good people do bad things when under the influence of authority or a power situation. </li></ul>
    16. 16. <ul><li>My main research question as given above, what makes good people turn bad or do bad things is supported by the research that I have found with the exception of a skeptic Finkelstein (2009). The resources found offer a legitimate amount of evidence to back up the argument that good people turn bad because they are put into “tough” situations where they may be influenced by an authority or are put into a power situation. The resources discuss events where people were put into this type of situation and the result of it; the resources give details of each event which further backs up the argument. The main research question along with the other formulated research questions fit right in with the research that has been done, the overall goal is to solve why good people do bad things? And this research question asks just that. The below information is a review of the events that back up the argument as given by the resources/research. </li></ul>
    17. 17. <ul><li>Wallis (2004) describes the events of Abu Ghraib, “Psychologists and historians who study torture give what is probably the most disturbing explanation of all: they are us.” This quote alone gives the impression that good ordinary people are capable of almost anything as explained by Wallis (2004) under certain circumstances almost anyone is capable of committing the same horrible things done at Abu Ghraib. In a brief explanation of the events that occurred at Abu Ghraib here is a brief description as given by Discover (2007), in May 2004 the world saw images of American men and women taking part in horrific forms of torture against civilians they were supposed to be guarding; these images include the American men and women punching, slapping, kicking, stacking the civilians into naked piles, and many other acts that are seen as horrible/evil. Wallis (2004) goes into detail about how the American men and women were who did these horrible things, this gives us a better view into how good/ordinary they were which backs us the argument of good people doing bad things. </li></ul>
    18. 18. <ul><li>The Stanford Prison Experiment is best explained by its creator Philip Zimbardo, in his 2007 peer-reviewed article named Revisiting the Stanford Prison Experiment: a Lesson in the Power of Situation. This article backs up the argument by giving a detailed overview of the experiment done in the 1970’s that involved 24 participants that were physically and mentally healthy, with no history of crime or violence this made it sure that the participants were all “good apples,” (Zimbardo, 2007). In Zimbardo’s book The Lucifer Effect (2007) and the article given above (2007) it shows the effects of the experiment on the participants or in other words the “good apples” within days the prisoners had been exposed to extreme stress and the guards had begun to act out in outrageous behaviors such as abusing the “prisoners.” “The situational forces in that bad barrel had overwhelmed the goodness of most of those infected by their viral power,” (Zimbardo, 2007). This backs up the argument given, why good people do bad things in this case being put into a power situation. </li></ul>
    19. 19. <ul><li>Stanley Milgram’s experiment with electric shock is very well known and the experiment is centered on what people will do when influenced by an authority, (Begley, 2009). Milgram’s experiment showed that even when the “learner” is screaming in pain the “teacher” or the participant (volunteer) continues to increase the voltage of the electric shock because the authority (scientist/experimenter) tells the “teacher” that they have to continue, (Begley, 2009). This backs up the argument that good people do evil things when influenced by an authority. </li></ul>
    20. 20. <ul><li>Conclusion </li></ul><ul><li>Through this research paper I believe that there are extensive resources to prove the hypothesis when ordinary good people are put into either a power situation or situation where they are influenced by authorities they will often times go bad or do bad things. This research paper has truly opened my eyes to why good people do evil things even when they believe that they may never be capable of such acts. It is scary think that being put into a power situation or being influenced by an authority can bring a seemingly average good person to be so evil to others. </li></ul>

    ×