Most theories suggest that only very disturbed people are capable of administering pain to an ordinary citizen if they are ordered to do so.Tags: Type An EssayPlacement Experience EssayEffect Of Obesity EssayEnglish Homework SheetsStructural Essay CompetitionsLeonardo Davinci Research PaperEssay Plantation
14 persons did not obey the experimenter and stopped before reaching the highest levels.
All 40 participants continued to give shocks up to 300 volts.
Although you could state a scientific hypothesis in various ways, most hypotheses are either "If, then" statements or else forms of the null hypothesis.
The null hypothesis sometimes is called the "no difference" hypothesis.
Let's say you decide to eat greasy food every day for a week and record the effect on your face. So, if you eat fatty food every day for a week and suffer breakouts and then don't breakout the week that you avoid greasy food, you can be pretty sure something is up. Probably not, since it is so hard to assign cause and effect.
Then, as a control, for the next week, you'll avoid greasy food and see what happens. However, you can make a strong case that there is some relationship between diet and acne.Current theories focus on personal characteristics to explain wrong-doing and how someone can intentionally harm others.In a survey, professionals such as doctors, psychologist and laymen predicted that a small proportion of a population (1-3%) would harm others if ordered to do so.When asking the experimenter if they should stop, they were instructed to continue.Of the 40 participants in the study, 26 delivered the maximum shocks.The study shows that people are able to harm others intentionally if ordered to do so.It provides evidence that this dynamic is far more important than previously believed, and that personal ethics are less predictive of such behavior. Discussion and Conclusion What are our thought about the results compared to other relevant theories.The participant believed that he was delivering real shocks to the learner. As the experiment progressed, the teacher would hear the learner plead to be released and complain about a heart condition.Once the 300-volt level had been reached, the learner banged on the wall and demanded to be released.In the recent war trial with Adolph Eichmann, he claims to only have been “following orders". Can people harm others because they are merely obeying orders?Can people be ordered to act against their moral convictions?