Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Books, Movies, Food, Wine, and Whatever -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: JohnM who wrote (44019)	11/4/2016 12:31:00 PM
From: epicure	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 51695

They actually debriefed as many of the subjects as they could, with a psychologist, to "help" them- most of them didn't need help. I think only 1.5% or less felt negative about their experience. And a whopping 79% or so thought it was valuable research and needed to be pursued.

To: JohnM who wrote (44019)	11/4/2016 12:34:44 PM
From: JohnM	Respond to of 51695

This wikipedia link en.wikipedia.org provides much more information than the one for Milgram. However, it downplays reports of its effects on subjects, the "teachers." I'm beginning to conclude that the profession simply changed its mind over the years because it was so uniformly negative on the procedures then. There was genuine belief that the findings were accurate (though they suffered from the usual methodological flaws of these kinds of social psychology experiments--small size, college students or affiliates, and so on).