Explaining Meeus & Raaijmakers Experiment

369 Words2 Pages
Arguably the most controversial experiment ever conducted in Social Psychology, Milgram’s Experiment, drew much criticism for not only being unethical but also for downright being ambiguous. Many thought that parts of Milgram’s Experiment were rather unclear. For instance, the participants were told that the “shocks” were painful but not lethal, when in fact they were extremely dangerous. Also, many believed that the form of punishment used in the experiment was rather “old-fashioned,” since psychological violence is much more prominent in today’s world than physical violence. In 1983, nearly two decades later, Meeus and Raaijmakers decided to replicate Milgram’s basic study but wanted to improve on these problems within the study. The aim of the experiment was to see whether or not the participants would unquestionably obey authority in an everyday setting, such as in a job interview. The experiment took place in the University of Holland. There were three people involved in the study: a University professor, an actor posed as a “job applicant” and the participant who would issue the Psychological abuse. The applicant followed a script, and had to pass a number of questions to “get the job.” To get the participants involved in the study, they were told that the job requires the ability to handle stress, so they had to cause stress to the applicant during the interview. The participants were also told that the interview was part of a study to examine the relationship between stress and test success. The interviewee had electrodes stuck on his skull to add to the belief that the applicant’s stress levels are being measured during the interview. Consequently, informing the participants to the motive of the interview led to them psychologically abusing the interviewee. Once the interview started, the participants were ordered to make a series of negative remarks

More about Explaining Meeus & Raaijmakers Experiment

Open Document