Introduction
Broadly speaking, Milgram explores the intensity with which people have to undergo mental pressures in adhering to orders and instructions from a distinguished authority. The author explores real-life situations and behavior where an individual has to take action regardless of their unwillingness, such as the case of Abraham in the Bible (Milgram, 1965). The study experiments on the behavioral patterns of an individual, say S, commanded by E to hurt Z, whether the person S will accept or refute the command. The results indicate that people are more likely to submit to orders, yet not everyone is willing to submit. While some people did submit, some failed to submit despite severe punishment, which is less likely to occur in a real-life situation. Therefore, people will submit less in real-life situations but obey the commands of people in power.
Similarly, Gu et al. (2020) explore the impact of authority and status on human behavior. The study adds to and improves previous research findings on the effects of power on corruption. The study conducts three experiments to explore the conflicting results of previous studies on the issue (Gu et al., 2020). After measuring the corruption intent in a scenario involving manipulations in the first experiment, the researcher found that power has a significant effect. Participants with low power conditions had significantly lower power scores than those in high-power conditions. In the second experiment, the results revealed that power and status have a significant effect based on moderation analysis, power manipulation check, and status manipulation check. Equally, the results from the third experiment in the study revealed that power and status significantly impact human behavior based on moderation and preliminary analyses. Therefore, the research concludes that status plays a significant role in understanding why there are conflicting results in studies on the impacts of power on corruption.
Perceivably, the social-Cognitive approach best explains the social psychology approaches used in both studies. The approach suggests that human beings notice, interpret and judge behavior from how others behave (Gu, et al., 2020). Arguably, the approach further suggests that people can better understand the impacts of patterns of thoughts on behavior through understanding the information processing model of social behavior. I believe that Milgram used the social psychology approach in his study because he used an experiment to recognize, interpret and judge the participants’ behavior. In short, he uses an investigation to understand the patterns of thoughts of his participants and their impacts on whether the participant chooses to obey or disobey the commands. Similarly, the modern study arguably used the social-cognitive approach because it recognizes, interprets, and judges human behavior under manipulation.
Comparing the classical and the modern peer-reviewed readings, there have been little to no changes in obedience and disobedience. According to Milgram (1965), human beings are likely to adhere to instructions upon command. Similarly, Gu et al. (2020) suggest that people adhere to instructions and orders from higher authorities, such as the military adheres to their government’s commands. However, in modern studies, status influence how people submit to command. A high status results in decreased corruption, while a low status leads to increased corruption.
In his study, Milgram has partly demonstrated the changes that have taken place in the field of social psychology over the years. However, little information on changes in research over time results from the period when the study was conducted (Milgram, 1965). Unlike today, in the 1940s, there were not many studies on social psychology. Milgram demonstrates how particular events and studies have facilitated change in social psychology research. On the other hand, the modern survey of “Does Power Corrupt?” has demonstrated the changes in social psychology research over the years. The authors have mentioned the different studies that impact the study positively and negatively. Notably, there are conflicting results from previous studies on power and status relating to human behavior.
Impacts of the research trends on human behavior
Milgram’s experiment is renowned and has significantly impacted human behavior. Besides influencing human behavior, the experiment has significantly impacted social psychology research. Some elements of the research trigger modern researchers to explore further (Oleynick, Thrash, LeFew, Moldovan, & Kieffaber, 2014). Besides, a study has to be repeated severally to confirm the validity of the claims. As a result, different studies on human behavior have emerged, including the survey explored in this paper, “Does power corrupt? The moderating effect of status.” Arguably, the report by Hannah Arendt on “the trial of Adolph Eichmann in Jerusalem” inspired Milgram’s research. The question that triggered Milgram’s study is the claim about the banality of evil, whether being commanded to do particular activities causes evil acts to come from ordinary people to accomplish the command. As a result, Milgram experimented with the likelihood of humans obeying commands that cause harm to others or promote evil. Besides Arendt’s report, his studies in social psychology at Havard informed the direction of his research. For instance, his studies struck curiosity to learn how group behavior influences individual behavior.
The study on “Does power corrupt?” is an extension of classical research on social psychology. Over the years, since the 1940s, there have been a series of studies exploring social psychology (Gu, et al., 2020). Relating to this study, there have been multiple studies on the impacts of power on human behavior. The foundation of the arguments in the study lies in a survey by Acton and Himmelfarb in 1948 that discovered that power impacts corruption in equal measures. Therefore, high power leads to higher bribery while lower power leads to a lower bribery rate. Since then, different studies have emerged to boost or argue against the research findings. While some studies have discovered zero relationships between power and self-interested behaviors and corruption, other studies have boosted the original findings that power destroys public surplus and increases individuals’ payoffs. Therefore, the research trends since 1948 have shaped the direction of modern study. The current study explores the moderating possibilities of acquiring both results by conducting three experiments for the different variables, power, and status.
Milgram (1965) suggests that there are two behavioral reactions to social situations; obedience and disobedience. Arguably, people direct their actions and take responsibility for the results of those actions (Milgram, 1965). Yet, the situation in which one is placed determines the level of an individual to obey unwillingly. The study and experiment suggest that many people are willing to engage in actions that harm others when placed under social pressure. Arguably, Milgram demonstrates the extremes that people are willing to go to obey authority. The study motivates human beings to continue adhering to instructions regardless of whether they are right or wrong.
Influence on society
Both studies assessed in the current paper contribute to understanding human behavior and suggest appropriate behavior when facing particular situations. The classical study demonstrates through an experiment the effects of authority on human behavior (Milgram, 1965). People commit to specific actions blindly, provided that a higher authority instructs them. It enlightens society on the need to follow their decisions without being influenced by authority. At the same time, the study suggests that authority is of great importance; hence human beings should respect and obey their orders.
Alternatively, the modern study explored in this paper demonstrates the impacts of power and status on human behavior. It enlightens society on balancing power and status, especially in the current era where corruption is at its peak (Gu et al., 2020). The study informs society of the need to eradicate the impacts of power and status on human behavior in the current era. In a world where the rich get more affluent and the poor continue getting poorer because they lack access to important elements such as education, health and proper nutrition, there is a need to balance power and status, so everyone gets equal chances. Yet, employment today is based on corruption where only family members and relatives get the opportunity to work in well-performing industries. Without bribery, acquiring a good job or getting a leadership position is hard. Therefore, the study informs society that the two elements impact human behavior.
Arguably, both studies claim that human beings blindly adhere to strict instructions despite their unwillingness to commit such activities. To some extent, the experiment promotes the message that human beings should obey authority even when people are hurting others (Milgram, 1965). It informs society to blindly follow the authority even when they are instructed to hurt others. It is the reason why terrorist groups like Alqaeda continue hurting people globally, which might be against their will. Yet, they have to obey the higher power that commands them to commit particular criminal activities. Again, the study harms others in society, especially Milgram’s experiment. Allowing participants to harm others means that hurting others is legal and permitted. Harmful groups such as Alqaeda have engaged in destructive activities through the years, such as being involved in suicide bombs to harm oneself and others. Further, the studies discourage people from disobeying authority when they are not content with what they are commanded. While it might be a positive aspect of the study because it informs society not to commit when actions they are commanded to do are negative, it has some negative aspects. It encourages society not to obey authority when they are not content with commands. Arguably, some people might take advantage to reject orders that are beneficial to society.
At the same time, society can apply the results of classical and modern studies to improve their lives. Milgram’s concluded that people would submit less in real-life situations but obey the commands from people in power. Again, it encourages society not to commit to activities that harm others (Gu et al., 2020). The aspect is applicable in real life, mainly when a dilemma arises on whether to obey or disobey a command from authority. For instance, during the covid-19 pandemic, most governments commanded their citizen to adhere to a set of guidelines like wearing a mask and maintaining social distance. Based on the study’s conclusion, citizens must adhere to the instructions to avoid harming themselves and others. The results and conclusion on “Does power corrupt?” can be applied in fighting corruption in modern society. Today, corruption is on the rise, affecting some groups and benefiting others.
Arguably, elements of social psychology research as identified in the two studies can be applied to influence change in real-life situations. In a situation where the people in authority take advantage of powerless people or people of low status, the element of obedience and disobedience can be applied to impact behavior change (Gu et al., 2020). For instance, parents can utilize the element to influence change in their children. Children will likely change and improve their behavior when their parents, as their higher authority, instruct them to change. For instance, commanding a child to clean their room every morning is an element of social psychology research. Another experience where the aspects of social psychology research are applicable is in the military, where one higher-rank soldier commands another soldier to behave in a particular way. For instance, a leader soldier can supervise his crew not to engage in substance abuse. The lower-rank soldier will obey the command because it comes from a higher authority and does not promote harm. Social psychology knowledge significantly impacts human behavior and explains why human behavior changes. Understanding social psychology profoundly influences individual and societal well-being, including understanding bullying, crime, and aggression. For instance, social psychology informs one on the need to behave morally towards others and not to harm others without reason. Social psychology research explains the various psychological elements that define why humans behave the way they do.
Ethical considerations
Milgram (1965) utilizes an experimental research design to explore human behavior. Multiple ethical issues present themselves within the experiment, including violation of the right to withdrawal, participant protection, and deception (Milgram, 1965). Arguably, Milgram used deception on participants to make them believe that they underwent the pain of shock, yet all learners in the study were Milgram’s associates. At the same time, the experiment violated ethical principles in research because participants involved in the study were not protected. Participants were afraid of hurting their fellow participants by shocking them. Although Milgram finds it ethical because it was a short-term experiment, it caused participants to endure severe circumstances that could lead to psychological impairment. The final moral issue within Milgram’s study is the withdrawal right.
According to the “British Psychological Society,” researchers must notify participants of their freedom to exit the experiment at their will. Yet, Milgram encouraged participants to continue the experiment regardless of the hardship encountered (Milgram, 1965). He stated, “ Please continue; the experiment requires that you continue, it is absolutely essential that you continue, and you have no other choice but to continue.” To make the study ethically appropriate, Milgram should have permitted the human subjects to exit the study at their will. Alternatively, he should have used a different approach to experiment with the obedience level of an average person instead of tricking them into believing that they were hurting another person.
The study violates the formal ethical guidelines for the protection of participants. Milgram experimented in an unethical fashion, considering that he intensified the participant’s psychological states and discouraged them from exiting the study (Milgram, 1965). Although the study targets the behavior of an average person under stated guidelines, it is not appropriate to manipulate participants to that extreme. At the time of the experiment, there were not many restrictions and emphasis on ethical issues in research, unlike in the current era. Had the study been conducted today, the “Psychology Research Ethics Board” would prohibit the experiment from taking place.
On the other hand, the study by Gu et al. (2020) seems to have adhered to all ethical considerations in research. With an experimental research design, it is expected that the study will emphasize confidentiality, informed consent, voluntary participation, and the potential for harm (Gu et al., 2020). First and foremost, the study ensures fully utilizing informed consent on participants in the three studies. Providing informed consent was the first step in each experiment. At the same time, participation was voluntary, considering that the study recruited willing participants through online channels. Further, the study incorporates all the updated ethical considerations in research. Therefore, it can be termed to have adhered to all the formal ethical guidelines. Arguably, the study is modern, yet there have been multiple amendments to the ethical guidelines in research. Today, there are more strict rules and guidelines in research compared to the past, which explains the difference in ethical considerations in the two studies
References
Gu, Z., Liu, L., Tan, X., Liang , Y., Dang , J., Wei, C., et al. (2020, August ). Does power corrupt? The moderating effect of status. International Journal of Psychology, 55(4), 499-508. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijop.12629
Milgram, S. (1965). Some Conditions of Obedience and Disobedience to Authority. Human Relations, 18(1), 57-76. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/001872676501800105
Oleynick, V. C., Thrash , T. M., LeFew, M. C., Moldovan, E. G., & kieffaber, p. d. (2014). The scientific study of inspiration in the creative process: challenges and opportunities. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2014.00436
write