2017/10/13 by S. Alexander Haslam, Stephen Reicher · 2 citations
Social Sciences · #Psychology of Social Influence #Stalking, Cyberstalking, and Harassment #Crime, Deviance, and Social Control
paper · doi:10.1146/annurev-lawsocsci-110316-113710
openalex publication_date 2017/10/13 · openalex created_date 2025/10/10 · openalex updated_date 2026/07/30
Despite being conducted half a century ago, Stanley Milgram's studies of obedience to authority remain the most well-known, most controversial, and most important in social psychology. Yet in recent years, increased scrutiny has served to question the integrity of Milgram's research reports, the validity of his explanation of the phenomena he reported, and the broader relevance of his research to processes of collective harm-doing. We review these debates and argue that the main problem with received understandings of Milgram's work arises from seeing it as an exploration of obedience. Instead, we argue that it is better understood as providing insight into processes of engaged followership, in which people are prepared to harm others because they identify with their leaders' cause and believe their actions to be virtuous. We review evidence that supports this analysis and shows that it explains the behavior not only of Milgram's participants but also of his research assistants and of the textbook writers and teachers who continue to reproduce misleading accounts of his work.