What study tested obedience to authority by shocking a learner?

What study tested obedience to authority by shocking a learner?

• A. Milgram Obedience Experiment (1961)
• B. Stanford Prison Experiment (Zimbardo)
• C. Belmont Report (1979)
• D. Institutional Review Board (IRB)

Answer: (A)

Obedience to authority under the pressure of an authoritative figure is being explored. In the Milgram obedience experiment from 1961, a participant acted as a “teacher” and administered electric shocks to a learner for every incorrect answer, with shocks increasing in intensity. The learner’s protests could be heard, and an experimenter in a lab coat repeatedly urged the teacher to continue, even as the situation escalated. The study found that a large proportion of people would follow the authority’s instructions to cause harm, revealing how powerful situational factors and perceived legitimacy of authority can override personal conscience. This result underscored why authority cues—such as a formal setting and an expert-looking experimenter—can strongly influence behavior, sometimes leading to harmful actions. Other items focus on different ideas: the Stanford Prison Experiment examines how assigned roles and simulated power affect behavior in a prison-like setting, while the Belmont Report and Institutional Review Board concern ethical oversight and protecting research participants — not obedience to authority through harm in a learning task.

Obedience to authority under the pressure of an authoritative figure is being explored. In the Milgram obedience experiment from 1961, a participant acted as a “teacher” and administered electric shocks to a learner for every incorrect answer, with shocks increasing in intensity. The learner’s protests could be heard, and an experimenter in a lab coat repeatedly urged the teacher to continue, even as the situation escalated. The study found that a large proportion of people would follow the authority’s instructions to cause harm, revealing how powerful situational factors and perceived legitimacy of authority can override personal conscience. This result underscored why authority cues—such as a formal setting and an expert-looking experimenter—can strongly influence behavior, sometimes leading to harmful actions.

Other items focus on different ideas: the Stanford Prison Experiment examines how assigned roles and simulated power affect behavior in a prison-like setting, while the Belmont Report and Institutional Review Board concern ethical oversight and protecting research participants — not obedience to authority through harm in a learning task.