雅思閱讀V42 S2電擊試驗(yàn)相關(guān)材料

2005-2-16 來源： 環(huán)球教育論壇

v42s2電擊試驗(yàn)這篇文章非常難懂，幸好有兩位朋友熱情相助，分別從《參考消息》和這個(gè)實(shí)驗(yàn)的創(chuàng)始人的個(gè)人網(wǎng)站找到了相關(guān)材料，發(fā)給無憂雅思網(wǎng)友共享。

Milgram's Study of Obedience

Aims: Milgram was sceptical about the idea that only strict authoritive figures could afflict the horrors seen during World War Two by the Nazis. He wanted to prove this view held by the general public wrong, by doing an obedience experiment to show that ordinary people of the general public could inflict harm on other human beings.

Procedures: 40 males aged 20-50 were recruited through a newspaper advertisement, and paid $4.50 to participate in a study regarding 'memory'. Participants were introduced to a confederate, Mr. Wallice. Lots were drawn to decide who would be the teacher and who would be the learner (the participant always became the teacher). The learner was strapped into a chair with electrodes on his hands.

The participant was to ask the learner questions, each incorrect answer was punished with an electric shock, beginning at 15 volts (very mild), going up by 15 volts for every incorrect answer up to 450 volts (danger - severe shock, xxx). The learner stated he had a mild heart condition.

Shocks were received in silence up until 300 volts, Mr. Wallice then complained of having heart trouble and pounded on the door to be let out. He then refused to answer any more questions. After a short while he became silent and was presumed unconscious or dead.

If the teachers questioned the experimenter (also a confederate), they were presented with four orders:

1. Please continue,

2. The experiment requires you to continue,

3. It is essential that you continue,

4. You have no choice, you must continue.

If the participant still refused to administer any more shocks, they were allowed to stop.

Unknown to the participant, the experimenter was an actor, as was the learner. The lots drawn to distinguish roles were fixed, and the electric shocks WERE NOT REAL.

Findings: Before the experiment began a class of psychology students were asked to estimate the percentage of participants who would continue giving shocks up to 450v, they estimated only 3%.

No one actually stopped below the level of intense shock. 22.5% stopped at 315v (extremely intense), 65% continued up until the maximum shock of 450v.

Participants showed extreme tension, biting fingernails, sweating, trembling, stuttering, groaning and three of the participants actually had full blown seizures.

During debriefing the participants completed a follow up questionnaire. 84% of them felt glad that they participated, 74% learnt something of personal importance.

Conclusion: Participants showed obedience to unjust authority beyond what anyone imagined. It showed how ordinary people could mindlessly obey orders to hurt another human being. The strengths of obedience and the tension created by social pressure were surprising.

Evaluation: It was UNETHICAL. Participants were recieved into believing it was a memory task, that the shocks were real and they did not have the right to withdraw or to give informed consent. They were also subjected to psychological harm. Milgram counteracts this argument by saying they were thoroughly debriefed and that from the questionnaire, they had been happy to have participated.

It lacked INTERNAL VALIDITY. The participants could not have belived the shocks were real. However Milgram states that from the results of the questionnaire, most participants believed in the setup.

It lacked EXTERNAL VALIDITY. This situation was unlikely to occur in everyday life therefore the participants acted in a different way to how they would usually act and the results could not be generalised to the real world. Though Milgram states that the participants clearly believed the situation was real (shown in video footage of the experiment) so the experiment had MUNDANE REALISM.

The participants could have been affected by OTHER FACTORS such as the prestigous environment.

There is vast CROSS-CULTURAL SUPPORT from further similar studies.

Other Points: Variations of this study has been carried out to investigate the effects of:

Environment,

Proximity to the victim,

Authoritive figures,

Social support and

Other factors have on the extent of obedience.

參考中文：

　　服從是指按照他人命令去行動的行為，也是人際互動的基本方式之一。但是，服從與從眾有著本質(zhì)的不同。在從眾情況下的個(gè)體，雖然沒有按照自己的本愿去行動，但卻是自愿的；而在服從情況下的個(gè)體，則完全是在不自愿的情況下，應(yīng)別人的要求去行動的。服從包括兩個(gè)方面：對權(quán)威人物命令的服從，在有一定組織的群體規(guī)范影響下的服從。

　　關(guān)于服從的經(jīng)典研究是由社會心理學(xué)家米爾格拉姆（S.Milgram）于1963年在美國的耶魯大學(xué)進(jìn)行的。這項(xiàng)研究是社會心理學(xué)領(lǐng)域中最具影響力的實(shí)驗(yàn)之一。米爾格拉姆通過公開招聘的方式，以每小時(shí)付給4.5美元的價(jià)格招聘到40名自愿參加者，他們包括教師、工程師、郵局職員、工人和商人，平均年齡在25~50歲之間。

　　實(shí)驗(yàn)者告訴被試，他們將參加一項(xiàng)研究懲罰對學(xué)生學(xué)習(xí)的影響的實(shí)驗(yàn)，要求兩人一組，用抽簽的方式?jīng)Q定其中一人當(dāng)學(xué)生，另一人當(dāng)教師。教師的任務(wù)是朗讀配對的關(guān)聯(lián)詞，學(xué)生的任務(wù)是記住這些詞，然后教師呈現(xiàn)這些詞，讓學(xué)生在給定的四個(gè)詞中選擇一個(gè)正確的答案，如果選錯(cuò)了，教師就通過按電鈕給學(xué)生以電擊作為懲罰。

　　事實(shí)上，研究者事先已經(jīng)安排了每次抽簽的結(jié)果總是真正的被試作為教師，而作為學(xué)生的卻是實(shí)驗(yàn)者助手。實(shí)驗(yàn)過程中，當(dāng)學(xué)生的假被試和當(dāng)教師的真被試被分別安排在不同的房間里，學(xué)生的胳膊上綁上電極，被綁在椅子上，以便在記憶詞匯發(fā)生錯(cuò)誤時(shí)被教師懲罰。

　　教師與學(xué)生之間是通過聲訊的方式進(jìn)行聯(lián)系的。教師的操作臺上每個(gè)電鍵都標(biāo)明了電擊的嚴(yán)重程度，從15V的輕微，到450V的致命。這些電擊實(shí)際上都是假的，但為了使教師相信整個(gè)實(shí)驗(yàn)，首先讓其接受一次強(qiáng)度為45V的電擊作為體驗(yàn)。

　　在實(shí)驗(yàn)中，每當(dāng)學(xué)生出錯(cuò)，主試就命令教師施與電擊，而且要逐步加大強(qiáng)度，隨著電擊強(qiáng)度的增加，學(xué)生也由呻吟、叫喊、怒罵逐漸到哀求、討?zhàn)?、踢打，最后昏厥。若被試表現(xiàn)猶豫，主試則嚴(yán)厲地督促他們繼續(xù)實(shí)驗(yàn)，并說一切后果由實(shí)驗(yàn)者承擔(dān)。

　　結(jié)果顯示，在整個(gè)實(shí)驗(yàn)過程中，當(dāng)電壓增加到300V時(shí)，只有5人拒絕再提高電壓；當(dāng)電壓增加到315V時(shí)，又有4人拒絕服從命令；電壓為330V時(shí)，又有2人表示拒絕；之后，在電壓達(dá)到345V、360V、375V時(shí)，又各有1人拒絕服從命令。共有14人（占被試的35%）做出了種種反抗，拒絕執(zhí)行主試的命令。另外26名被試（占被試的65%）則服從了實(shí)驗(yàn)者的命令，堅(jiān)持到實(shí)驗(yàn)的最后，盡管他們表現(xiàn)出了不同程度的緊張和焦慮。

　　影響服從的因素很多，概括起來主要有三個(gè)方面：

　?。?）命令發(fā)出者。他的權(quán)威性，他對執(zhí)行命令者是否關(guān)心、愛護(hù)，他是否監(jiān)督命令執(zhí)行的全過程等，都會影響到服從。

　?。?）命令的執(zhí)行者。他的道德水平、人格特征以及文化背景等也都會影響到他對命令的服從。

　?。?）情境因素。例如是否有人支持自己的拒絕行為，周圍人的榜樣行為怎樣，獎(jiǎng)勵(lì)結(jié)構(gòu)的設(shè)置情況，自己拒絕或執(zhí)行命令的行為反饋情況怎樣等，也會影響到個(gè)體的服從行為。

　　社會心理學(xué)家認(rèn)為個(gè)體之所以會有服從行為，主要的原因是兩個(gè)。

　　一、合法權(quán)力。我們通常認(rèn)為，在一定情境下，社會賦予了某些社會角色更大的權(quán)力，而自己有服從他們的義務(wù)。比如學(xué)生應(yīng)該服從教師，病人應(yīng)該服從醫(yī)生等，在實(shí)驗(yàn)室中，被試就應(yīng)該服從主試，特別是陌生的情境更加強(qiáng)了被試服從主試命令的準(zhǔn)備狀態(tài)。

　　二、責(zé)任轉(zhuǎn)移。一般情況下，我們對于自己的行為都有自己的責(zé)任意識，如果我們認(rèn)為造成某種行為的責(zé)任不在自己，特別是當(dāng)有指揮官主動承擔(dān)責(zé)任時(shí)，我們就會認(rèn)為該行為的主導(dǎo)者不在自己，而在指揮官。因此，我們就不需要對此行為負(fù)責(zé)，于是發(fā)生了責(zé)任轉(zhuǎn)移，使得人們不考慮自己的行為后果。