Malaria conducted an experiment which Includes the subject of the experiment Is in a laboratory environment and is told to give increasingly severe electric shocks to another person. The subject is getting told to do so by a person in a white lab coat, who appears to be a scientist; but is actually an actor. The person in the white lab coat tells the subject to continue to Increase the level of shock the other person receives until they reach the level of “Danger Severe Shock. The subject is listening o the actor scream of terror each time the shock is increased. The person believed to be receiving these electric shocks is also an actor and isn’t actually receiving any electric shock whatsoever. The purpose of this experiment Is to see how far the subject will continue to shock this person before refusing to follow the Instructions from the person in the white lab coat. The independent variable in this experiment is authority. Authority is defined as the laboratory environment in this experiment.
We will write a custom essay sample
on Baumrind vs Milgram or any similar
topic specifically for you
While the dependent variable Is obedience, also known as how the subject will react to being told to increase the level of shock, no matter how much pain the other person is in. Banding criticized the variable of the laboratory environment by Malaria. Banding stated the laboratory is unfamiliar as a setting and the rules of behavior ambiguous compared to a clinician’s office. Because of the anxiety and passivity generated by the setting, the subject Is more prone to behave In an obedient, suggestible manner in the laboratory than elsewhere (Banding 48).
Banding believes this experiment should not be conducted within a laboratory because the environment is too influential on the person’s behavior. On the other hand, Malaria sees Bandsman’s argument as Invalid. Malaria believes that Abnormal Is actually helping hall explain the experiment. Since, the person Is In the environment, they feel more obligated to listen to authority. Banding actually helped Malaria prove his point. Malaria stated that Banding argues this experiment contains “ecological validity,” but Malaria rejects this argument that observed obedience does notcount because It occurred where it Is appropriate.
Page 2 Baumrind vs Milgram Essay
That is precisely why it does count. Banding wants us to believe that outside the laboratory we could not find an equal high expression of obedience. Yet, the fact that ordinary citizens are recruited to the military service and, on command, performharsher acts against people Is beyond dispute (Malaria 57-58). Amalgam’s mall argument to Banding believing that the environment was too influential was the military. Similar to the Malaria experiment, people in the military volunteer homeless to obey all instructions.
The military, on the other hand, does much more harm. In the military, regardless of what their beliefs are, they have to follow all orders. Which may include killing or severely harming others. The results of the experiment show 35% of the people still are disobedient; regardless of the environment, people still disobey authority. 35% of the people refused to finish through the experiment at the expense of the other person’s health. Malaria Is correct because Abnormal simply enhanced Amalgam’s theory.
The environment was 1 OFF variables are cause and affect. Because the subject was in the laboratory environment, the subject was more obedient. Not only did Malaria show that Banding enhanced his theory, he provided examples against Banding’s thoughts that obedience would not be sufficient in other environments. Malaria proved that the military does much worse than providing a fake electric shock to someone and those in the military still follow their instructions that they are told to do. Banding’s argument is simply invalid.See More on Psychology