上海市alevel补课机构,Alevel心理学案例分析Milgram的心理服从研究

　　在Alevel心理学学习和考试中，对于案例研究和分析占有着非常大的比重。今天A+国际教育小编就带大家分析一个经典的Alevel心理案例——Stanley Milgram对于“心理服从”实验的研究，来帮助同学们梳理Alevel心理学案例分析的思路和方法，一起来了解一下吧。

　　Context背景

　　One of the most famous studies of obedience in psychology was carried out by Stanley Milgram（1963）。Stanley Milgram,a psychologist at Yale University,conducted an experiment focusing on the conflict between obedience to authority and personal conscience.

　　“心理服从”最著名的研究由Stanley Milgram进行（1963）。耶鲁大学的心理学家Stanley Milgram，进行了一项实验，着眼于“服从权威”与“个人良心”（道德）的关系以及冲突。

　　He examined justifications for acts of genocide offered by those accused at the World War II,Nuremberg War Criminal trials.Their defense often was based on"obedience"-that they were just following orders from their superiors.

　　在德国二战的大屠杀中，有很多辩解基于——那些屠杀者之所以会杀很多人，仅仅是对命令及上级的服从。

　　The experiments began in July 1961,a year after the trial of Adolf Eichmann in Jerusalem.Milgram devised the experiment to answer the question:

　　实验开始于七月1961，阿道夫·艾希曼在耶路撒冷试行一年后。Milgram设计了实验来回答这个问题：

　　Could it be that Eichmann and his million accomplices in the Holocaust were just following orders?Could we call them all accomplices?"（Milgram,1974）。

　　Eichmann（阿道夫*艾希曼，纳粹高官，被称屠夫）和他的万千追随者只是在在屠杀中遵守命令吗？他们都可以被叫做同伙吗？

　　Aim目的

　　—Milgram（1963）was interested in researching how far people would go in obeying an instruction if it involved harming another person.

　　Milgram研究人们到底会何种程度的遵守指令，即使所给的指令中包含伤害别人。

　　Method方法

　　Lab experiment

　　Participants参与者

　　A newspaper advertisement was used to recruit 40 men aged 20-50（volunteer&self selecting）。The advertisement was asking for people to take part in a study on memory.

　　Respondents were from a range of backgrounds and jobs:

　　—37.5%manual laborers手工业者

　　—40%white collar workers白领

　　—22.5%professionals专业人士

　　All were from USA.

　　Procedure步骤

　　At the beginning of the experiment they were introduced to another participant——Mr.Wallace,who was actually a confederate of the experimenter在实验的开始，他们被介绍给另一个参与者—华勒斯先生—其实是实验者的同伙/合谋者。

　　They drew straws to determine their roles–learner or teacher–although this was fixed and participants were always the teacher.

　　他们用抽签来决定他们的角色——learner or teacher?

　　他们通过抽签决定，谁是learner谁是teacher这两个角色？

　　但是，这其中是满满的套路！

　　签早已经决定了，参与者永远只会抽到‘teacher’

　　Two rooms in the Yale Interaction Laboratory were used-one for the learner（with an electric chair）and another for the teacher and experimenter with an electric shock generator.

　　耶鲁实验室的两间实验室被使用—一间给learner使用，另一间给teacher和实验者使用，还有最重要的实验仪器—电震发生器。

　　The“learner”（Mr.Wallace）was strapped to a chair with electrodes.After he has learned a list of word pairs given him to learn,the"teacher"tests him by naming a word and asking the learner to recall its partner/pair from a list of four possible choices.

　　“学习者”（华勒斯先生）被绑在一个有电极的椅子上。在他学会了一组单词之后，“老师”，也就是participants，对他进行测试。

　　The teacher is told to administer an electric shock every time the learner makes a mistake,increasing the level of shock each time.There were 30 switches on the shock generator marked from 15 volts（slight shock）to 450（danger–severe shock）。

　　每一次学习者犯错误时，老师都会给学生一个电击，每次都会增加电击的水平。有30个开关上有15伏的冲击波发生器（轻微电击）至450（危险的，严重的休克）。

　　The learner gave mainly wrong answers（on purpose）and for each of these the teacher gave him an electric shock.

　　当learner（故意）给出错误的答案时，teacher就会给他实施电击。

　　When the teacher refused to administer a shock the experimenter was to give a series of orders/prods to ensure they continued.

　　当‘老师’拒绝执行电击，实验者将给他们一系列‘命令’来确保他们继续。

　　There were 4 prods and if one was not obeyed then the experimenter（Mr.Williams）read out the next prod,and so on.

　　Prod 1:Please continue.

　　Prod 2:The experiment requires you to continue.

　　Prod 3:It is absolutely essential that you continue.

　　Prod 4:You have no other choice but to continue.

　　Results结果

　　65%（two-thirds）of participants（i.e.teachers）continued to the highest level of 450 volts.All the participants continued to 300 volts.

　　65%（三分之二）的参与者（即教师）继续到最高水平的450伏。所有的参与者继续到300伏特。

　　Conclusion结论

　　1、People are much more obedient to destructive orders than we might expect.In fact,the majority of people are quite willing to obey destructive orders.

　　人们比我们想象的更服从于破坏性的命令。并且，事实上，大多数人都很愿意服从破坏性的命令。

　　2、People find receiving and obeying destructive orders highly stressful.They obey in spite of their emotional responses.The situation triggers a conflict between two deeply ingrained tendencies:to obey those in authority,and not to harm people.

　　人们发现接受和服从破坏性的命令非常有压力。尽管他们的情绪反应，他们还是服从了命令。这种情况引发了两种根深蒂固的倾向之间的冲突：尊重权威、上级？还是不去伤害别人？

　　通过以上Alevel心理学案例的分析，大家有没有从中体会出一些案例分析的思路呢？如果对于Alevel课程学习还有什么困惑，可以咨询A+国际教育线上老师，让老师一对一为你进行专业的课程辅导。