Yale University Experiment (May 1962)

Overview

• Conducted at the Elegant Interaction Laboratory at Yale University.
• Subjects: 40 males aged 20-50 from Greater New Haven, obtained via newspaper ads and direct mail.
• Experiment investigates effects of punishment on learning.

Subject Background

• Diverse occupations: from corporation presidents to plumbers.
• Varied educational levels: from incomplete elementary school to doctorates.

Experiment Procedure

• Subjects split into 'teachers' and 'learners'.
• Teachers read pairs of words; learners must remember them.
• Incorrect answers result in learners receiving electric shocks.
• Teachers instructed to increase shock voltage for each wrong answer.
• Teachers given a sample shock to estimate pain level.

Key Instructions to Teachers

• Begin with 15 volts for first wrong answer, increase with subsequent errors.
• Follow exact procedure for wrong answers: announce voltage, administer shock, and state correct word pair.
• Teachers urged to continue despite learners' protests or signs of distress.

Reactions Observed

• Nervous laughter from teachers observed in 14 of 40 subjects.
• Some teachers defied experimenter’s orders out of concern for learners.
• Teachers exhibited stress, questioned legitimacy and safety, and showed reluctance.

Experimenter's Role

• Provided authority and urged continuation.
• Assured teachers shocks were painful but not dangerous.

Key Findings

• Despite assurances, many teachers wished to stop when learners protested.
• After experiment, teachers reassured no real shocks were administered.
• Behavior showed obedience to authority even against personal conscience.
• 50% of subjects fully obeyed commands to administer maximum shock.

Variations and Effects

• Proximity of learner and experimenter influenced obedience levels.
• Less obedience when experimenter absent or giving orders via telephone.
• Physical presence of victim reduced obedience rates.
• Group dynamics: 90% defied if actors break off, obedience barely changes if actors comply.

Implications

• Raises questions about human nature and authority.
• Suggests potential for authority to compel harmful actions.
• Results suggest deeper exploration of authority's influence on behavior.