This document summarizes key findings from Stanley Milgram's famous obedience studies from the 1960s. It discusses how Milgram was trying to understand under what conditions people would obey commands from an authority figure, even if it meant harming another person. It describes Milgram's experimental setup where participants were told to administer electric shocks to a "learner" and how most participants (65%) continued shocking even after the learner protested in pain. The document also discusses factors that influenced obedience rates, such as proximity to the victim and authority figure. It concludes with Milgram's view that governments can command much obedience from subjects due to their prestige and authority.

1. Perception Test

2. Chapter 7
Conformity
AIB
College of
Business
Dr. Josh
Woods

3. Figure 7.1: Continuum
of Social Influence

4. Conformity
Tendency to change perceptions, opinions, or
behavior in ways that are consistent
with group norms.

5. Videos: Conformity

6. When all members of a group give an incorrect
response to an easy question, most people most
of the time conform with that response.
Answer: True… Let’s see why!
Putting Common Sense to the Test…

7. The Early Classics
Sherif’s study (1936)
Figure 7.3: Classic Case of Suggestibility
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Do
IxN6B4PQ
Asch’s study (1951)
Figure 7.4: Line Judgment Task
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TYI
h4MkcfJA

8. Figure 7.4: Line Judgment Task
Used in Asch's Conformity Studies
Asch, 1955.
Return to main slide

9. What Did Asch’s Participants Do?
Participants went along with the clearly incorrect
majority 37% of the time.
However, 25% of the participants NEVER
conformed.
Still, 50% conformed for at least half of the
critical presentations.

11. Why Do People Conform?
Informational Influence: People conform
because they believe others are correct in their
judgments.
 Figure 7.5 – Conformity Effects on Perception
Normative Influence: People conform because
they fear the consequences of appearing deviant.
We do not want this
war, this violence, and
we're ashamed that the
President of the United
States is from Texas
#10
#43

13. Figure 7.5: Conformity Effects on
Perception
Return to main slide

14. Types of Conformity
Private Conformity: Changes in both overt
behavior and beliefs.
Public Conformity: Superficial change in overt
behavior only.

15. Table 7.1: Two Types of Conformity

16. Majority Influence: Group Size
Conformity increases with group size -
- but only to a point.
Why?
 Law of “diminishing returns”?
 Can anyone tell me what this is?
 Light bulb example
 Perception that others are either in
“collusion” or “spineless sheep”?

17. Majority Influence:
Having an Ally
When there was an ally in Asch’s study,
conformity dropped by almost 80%.
Table 7.2 – On Being a Lone Dissenter

18. Table 7.2: On Being a Lone Dissenter:
Voting Patterns of U.S. Supreme Court

19. Figure 7.1: Continuum
of Social Influence

20. Compliance
Changes in behavior that are elicited
by direct requests.

21. Compliance
It’s technique…Want a firmer
stomach? You need technique to
isolate those abdominal muscles.
She’s doing sit ups. Sit ups don’t
work. They don’t isolate the
abdominal muscles. And look at her
legs. Everywhere! The wrong way.
How long do you think it took him to make this argument?

22. Mindlessness and Compliance
Talking fast and catching people off guard can
improve compliance rates.
People can be disarmed by the simple phrasing of
the request.
 May I use the Xerox machine because I’m in a rush? 94%
 May I use the Xerox machine? 60%
 May I use the Xerox machine because I need to make some
copies? 93%

23. Norm of Reciprocity
The powerful norm of reciprocity dictates that we
treat others as they have treated us.
 This norm leads us to feel obligated to repay for acts of
kindness, even when unsolicited.
 Such as peppermints with your check
 Or a thank you hand-written on a bill
 Would you like some coffee?
Norm of reciprocity is relatively short-lived.

24. Compliance:
Sequential Request Strategy I
Have you ever…
Accepted a free trial subscription?
Clipped a coupon for and purchased a product
you don’t regularly use?
Applied for a store credit card just to get the
one-time 10% discount?
Applied for credit with free interest for a year
Tried a free sample at the grocery store?

25. Figure 7.1: Continuum
of Social Influence

26. Compliance:
Sequential Request Strategies
I: Foot in the Door
II: Lowballing
III: Door in the Face
IV: That’s Not All, Folks!

27. Sequential Request Strategy I:
Foot-in-the-Door Technique
Person begins with a very small request;
secures agreement; then makes a separate
larger request.
Example:
 Car Purchase “You have a better warranty than the guy
who bought this car brand new.”
 “Would you like more coverage?”

28. Foot-in-the-Door
& Low-Balling
How much is a brand new Chevy Volt?
 Let’s build one
 http://www.chevrolet.com/volt-electric-car.html
How much does it cost to rent a Uhaul?
 $39.95/day
 Plus “optional” insurance ($53.95/day) – foot-in-the-
door
 Plus taxes – low balling
 Plus mileage – low balling
 Plus Environmental fee (…what?) – low balling
 Plus Gas – low balling

29. $300 f0r 4 days?
But… $40 x 4 is $160

30. Sequential Request
Strategy II: Low-Balling
Person secures agreement
with a request and then
increases the size of that
request by revealing
hidden costs.
Why is it effective?
 Psychology of commitment
 I need as many volunteers as
possible…

31. Sequential Request Strategy III:
Door-in-the-Face Technique
Person begins with a very large request that will be
rejected; then follows that up with a more moderate
request.
Why is it effective?
 Perceptual contrast?
 Boy Scout: Would you buy two circus tickets for ten bucks?
 Cialdini: No
 Boy Scout: How about two chocolate bars for $2?
 Cialdini: OK
 Reciprocal concessions: They are compromising with me.
Perhaps I should meet them in the middle.

32. 0
10
20
30
40
50
Percent That
Agreed
Real Request Only After Declining Initial
Request
Willing to Take Delinquents to the Zoo?
Would you be willing to work at a juvenile delinquents center
for two hours a week over the next two years without pay?

33. Sequential Request Strategy IV:
That’s Not All, Folks!
Person begins with a somewhat inflated
request; then immediately decreases the
apparent size of the request by offering a
discount or bonus.
Infomercials are famous for this
 Miracle Blades - $500 value for $40 – Can this be true?
 And if you call now you can get it half off, plus an extra
set, and I’ll even throw in this extra knife!!!!!!
 If you buy one you get two free!

34. Burger et al
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
Sales
75 Cents Reduced to 75 cents
Price of Cupcakes

35. Table 7.3: Sequential
Request Strategies

36. Assertiveness:
When People Say No
To be able to resist the trap of compliance
techniques, one must:
 Be vigilant
 Not feel indebted by the norm of reciprocity
Compliance techniques work smoothly only if
they are hidden from view.

37. Most people will shock someone until they are
dead if instructed to do so.
Answer: True… Let’s see why!
Putting Common Sense to the
Test…

38. Figure 7.1: Continuum
of Social Influence

39. Obedience
Behavior change produced by the
commands of authority

40. The Milgram Obedience Studies
(1963 & 1965)
A N D “ M I L G R A M R E V I S I T E D ”
( J E R R Y B U R G E R , 2 0 0 9 )

41. Obedience to Authority
Milgram Study (Milgram, 1963, 1965)
Experimental Question: Under what
conditions will people carry out the
commands of an authority figure and when
will they refuse to obey?
 Milgram, S. (1963). Behavioral Study of Obedience.
Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 67, 371-
378.
 Milgram, S. (1965). Some conditions of obedience and
disobedience to authority. Human Relations, 18, 57-76

42. Table 7.4:
The Learner's
Scripted Protests in
the Milgram
Experiment

43. Milgram Study Results
The experimental setup was described to 40
psychiatrists. They predicted that no one
would go beyond the 10th level (150 volts)
Actual results: 65% of the subjects obeyed the
experimenter and shocked the “learner” all the way
to 450 volts (“Danger: Severe Shock”)
No difference between men and women

44. Milgram’s Additional Research Findings
Conditions that decreased obedience:
 1) Proximity of the “learner”:
 Obedience decreased if the learner was in the same room as
the teacher
 Obedience decreased if the teacher had to physically place
the learner’s hand on a shock plate
 Explanation: visual cues of someone else’s pain triggers
an empathic response

45. Milgram’s Additional Research Findings
Conditions that decreased obedience:
 2) Closeness of the authority figure
 Usually the experimenter sat a few feet away from the
teacher
 Obedience decreased when the experimenter…
 left the lab and gave the instructions by telephone
 was never seen and instructions were left on a tape recorder
 Also found: when the experimenter was in another room or
when he was not present the “teachers” falsely reported how
much shock they were giving the “learner”
 Explanation: people will take a stronger stand when they do
not have to encounter an authority figure face-to-face

46. Milgram’s Additional Research Findings
Conditions that decreased obedience
 3) Prestige of the experimenter
 The initial studies took place at Yale University with the
experimenter dressed in a white lab coat
 Obedience decreased when the study was moved to
Bridgeport, Connecticut and conducted by the fictional
“Research Associates of Bridgeport”

47. Milgram Study Results
Conditions that decreased obedience
 4) Disobedient models
 When other “teachers” (who were actually confederates of
the experimenter) sat with the teacher and disobeyed the
experimenter, 90% of the real subjects disobeyed as well

48. Figure 7.7: Factors That
Influence Obedience
Based on Stanley Milgram, Obedience to Authority, 1974.

49. Milgram Study Commands
Experimenter prompts: if the “teacher” objected to
continuing the experiment, the experimenter’s script
included the following prompts:
 Please continue (or “Please go on”)
 The experiment requires that you continue
 It is absolutely essential that you continue
 You have no other choice, you must go on

50. Milgram’s Conclusions
“If in this study an anonymous experimenter could
successfully command adults to subdue a fifty-one year old
man, and force on him painful electric shocks against his
protests one can only wonder what government, with its
vastly greater authority and prestige can command of its
subjects.”
-- Stanley Milgram

51. A M E R I C A N S A R E G R E E D Y
A M E R I C A N S A R E P O W E R - H U N G R Y .
A M E R I C A N S O N L Y C A R E F O R T H E M S E L V E S .
T H E A M E R I C A N E M P I R E M U S T B E D E S T R O Y E D .
T H E I R T I M E M U S T C O M E T O A N E N D .
Rhetoric

59. T H E Y A R E J U S T E V I L .
I T ’ S N O T O U R P R O B L E M .
T H E Y B R O U G H T I T O N T H E M S E L V E S .
W E C A N ’ T S O L V E A L L T H E W O R L D ’ S P R O B L E M S .
Rhetoric

61. Did you know the White House has been set ablaze and almost burnt
down by one of our greatest enemies?

68. T H E Y A R E J U S T E V I L
I T ’ S N O T O U R P R O B L E M .
T H E Y B R O U G H T I T O N T H E M S E L V E S .
W E C A N ’ T S O L V E A L L T H E W O R L D ’ S P R O B L E M S .
Rhetoric

74. 2.386 killed
68 were civilians

78. 346,000-356,000 killed
At least 300,000 civilians

81. Ever Wonder What the Big Deal is With
those Origami Cranes?

82. Milgram’s Primary Question:
Are We All Nazis?
No, an individual’s character can make a
difference.
The point: changing minds can be more
powerful than killing radicals.