the critical trials, whereas when one confederate gave the correct answer on all the critical trials conformity dropped. This contradicts Zimbardo's assertion that behavioral scripts associated with the oppositional roles of prisoner and guard were the sole source of guidance 35 and leads us to question the claim that conformity to these role-related scripts was the primary cause of guard brutality. To understand tyranny, then, we need to transcend the prevailing orthodoxy that this derives from something for which humans have a natural inclinationa Lucifer effect to which they succumb thoughtlessly and helplessly (and for which, therefore, they cannot be held accountable). The experimenter arrives and tells you that the study in which you are about to participate concerns people's visual judgments. Ultimately, then, the BBC Prison Study came close to recreating the tyranny of the Stanford Prison Experiment.
Apparently, people conform for two main reasons: because they want to fit in with the group (normative influence) and because they believe the group is better informed than they are (informational influence). People from Western cultures (such as America and the UK) are more likely to be individualistic and don't want to be seen as being the same as everyone else. Unlike Zimbardo, however, we took no leadership role in the study. Internalisation (genuine acceptance of group norms). Perspect Psychol Sci 3: 301304. Yet, regarding advocacy, it is striking how destructive acts were presented as constructive, particularly investigative Journalism: The New Documentary in Milgram's case, where scientific progress was the warrant for abuse. (Eds.) (2012) Social psychology: revisiting the classic studies. Jenness (1932) was the first psychologist to study conformity. . The role of discussion in changing opinion regarding a matter of fact. Blass T (Ed.) (2000) Obedience to authority. Put slightly differently, it operationalizes an apparent tragedy of the human condition: our desire to be good subjects is stronger than our desire to be subjects who do good.
This occurs 'when an individual accepts influence because the content of the induced behavior - the ideas and actions of which it is composed - is intrinsically rewarding. However their arguments proved particularly potent because they seemed to mesh with real-world examplesparticularly evidence of the banality of evil.