The Herd Mentality
During the early 1960s, a psychologist named Stanley Milgram set up an experiment to test the willingness of human subjects to obey an authority figure, even when the command they were being given was inherently and blatantly harmful. His participants were instructed by an experimenter to deliver an escalating series of electric shocks to another ’subject’ in response to an incorrect answer. The subject being ’shocked’ was actually a cohort, and was only acting, but the original subject did not know this and believed that he or she was actually delivering a very painful shock to another human being. If at any time subjects protested the treatment of their fellow participant, the experimenter would instruct them to continue on with their shocks. The two participants were separated by a wall, and as the voltage increased the individual being ’shocked’ would begin to protest the shocks, bang on the walls, complain about a heart condition, scream in pain, and then would eventually go completely, deadly silent.
65% of the participants in the experiment continued to shock the subject until the maximum voltage had been reached, at the request of the experimenter. They pumped up to 450 volts of electricity into another being, an obviously sentient being, merely because they were told to do so; that they wouldn’t be held responsible, that they should continue. And continue they did, even though it is noted that many appeared uncomfortable. Probably because they thought they killed someone.
Not a single participant refused to administer shocks before the voltage reached 300. Maybe not deadly, but not pleasant either.
Not a single participant who refused to administer the final shocks left the room to check on the individual without first asking permission or insisted that the experiment be stopped.
If you ever take a psychology class, you’ll probably hear about this study. It’s very famous and I think I’ve had it in every psychology class I’ve ever taken (quite a few). There’s a tendency to gloss it over, but when you step away from it and think of the actual meaning, it become very frightening indeed. If we take this study at face value:
- 65% of people would kill you if ordered to.
- 100% of people would cause you pain if ordered to.
If we consider this study in the context of animals, it makes even more sense. Very few people stop to think about just what they’re doing when they order a hamburger. We are told by society that our relationship to animals is okay, natural. If we protest, we are called zealots, terrorists, morons and kooks. In short, we are discredited for refusing to simply accept the instructions given to us by the libretto we call society.
We all know what the ‘right’ action would be in the case above. If you were shocking someone for no reason and they complained of heart pains or screamed in pain, you’d understand that to continue to cause them harm is not the correct action for various reasons. In many cases with animals, it is the same. We know that ‘cruelty’ to animals is wrong. But when the time comes, why are we still engaging in it?
Fredrick Nietzsche theorized that there was an essential cruelty inherent in human nature. Perhaps this experiment doesn’t document our willingness to follow the leader, but our willingness to unveil the desire for viscous behavior in all of us. Personally, I don’t believe it, but perhaps we should simply give up and, as a species, admit defeat on the compassion front. So what do we think? Are we simply guilty of the herd mentality we so callously mock, or are we apt to secretly revel in our own cruelty?
Some other interesting (and applicable in this context) caveats of the Milgram experiments:
When physical immediacy with the subject being shocked increased, ‘compliance’ decreased. Likewise, as the authority’s physical proximity decreased, so did the compliance.
When the authority telephoned the instructions to continue shocking, some participants lied to him about the fact that they had ceased to shock their subject.
Adding additional cohorts - ‘peers’ of the subject - changed the subject’s willingness to continue shocking their counterpart. If two peers refused to continue with the shocks, only 1% of people continued with the experiment. This experiment was repeated in 2006 and peer pressure was found to have less of an influence on stopping the experiment.
When this experiment was repeated for real (i.e. real shocks and, I’m assuming, real death) with a puppy instead of a human, 76% of participants continued to the end. All those who refused to continue on were male. The 13 women involved in the study all wept openly, but continued on with what they were instructed to do.
—
Crossposted @ That Vegan Girl
I hadn’t heard of that experiment with a puppy. Ugh. That’s so sad and disturbing. Disturbing from two perspectives:
1) that so many people tortured and killed the puppy simply because they were told/asked to.
2) that the experimenters themselves thought the experiment was worthy of torturing animals.
I would hope that I’m one of the few people who would refuse to participate, but… I’m not sure I would. I’m only human after all. There have been plenty of times when I’ve done things I’m ashamed of, and sometimes the only reason I did them was because someone told me to.
Even PETA employees who I’m sure honestly care deeply about animals have fallen into the trap and have harmed animals. Their excuses vary, but I’m sure the herd mentality plays are HUGE role in that.
Thank you for this article! It’s a great observation on human behavior and its impact upon animals.
This is possibly the most frightening concept imaginable.
“65% of the participants in the experiment continued to shock the subject until the maximum voltage had been reached, at the request of the experimenter. They pumped up to 450 volts of electricity into another being, an obviously sentient being, merely because they were told to do so; that they wouldn’t be held responsible, that they should continue. And continue they did, even though it is noted that many appeared uncomfortable. Probably because they thought they killed someone.”
“Not a single participant refused to administer shocks before the voltage reached 300. Maybe not deadly, but not pleasant either.”
This explains a so much about our society in a terribly disturbing way.
~ Recent blog post: Creative Advertisements at http://ooyes.net ~
This is possibly the most frighteningly distrubing concept imaginable. This is such a well written moving post that is has been submitted to Digg.com! Check it out and digg it here:
http://digg.com/health/The_Herd_Mentality
(This should also bring traffic to your blog!)
Thanks for taking the time to write it,
- Michelle
PS. If you decide to get a digg account be sure to friend me:
http://digg.com/users/Michiko280
because I would love to help spread your blog entries and share animal ethics stories with you!
~ Recent blog post: A Moment for the Pigs at http://Michiko280.wordpress.com ~
I prefer StumbleUpon, but I’ll use Digg sometimes, too. I just friended you
I have read of this experiment many times, too, but not the puppy version. There is one small chink of hope here: that when others stood up, people were more likely to stand up too. Which gives us all reason to continue to make ourselves heard, even when subjected to ridicule and relegated to the margins.
~ Recent blog post: Farm Sanctuary In The Washington Post at http://www.vegansoapbox.com ~
[After having written this rather lengthy comment, I see Judith has said the same thing much more succinctly and eloquently. But here goes...]
First of all, there is no excuse for performing these experiments on live puppy.
The Milgram experiments reveal some of the most frightening and sobering aspects of human nature. They show the severe extent to which we get our cues about acceptable behavior from others, especially those whom we consider to have authority. In society, these figures include parents, peers, friends whom we respect, the media, and perhaps celebrities.
The experiments also imply the profound effect of our actions on others. If parents take their kids to rodeos, and cheer as the contestants rope cows, and take their kids fishing, and treat reeling in fish who struggle and die from asphyxiation as great fun, the kids are likely to grow up inheriting those attitudes and behaviors and passing them onto their kids - and so on.
The same dynamic occurs when we eat meat. If parents - and schools and churches - build their meals and holidays and ceremonies around meat, kids develop a strong sense that meat-eating is normal and good. To have someone tell them years later that it’s wrong is jolting. Not that we should refrain from doing so. Eventually, the truth can set in.
But if parents eschew meat and teach their kids about the preciousness of life, and practice ahimsa, the kids will most likely inherit those compassionate qualities, also. Like this vegan couple and their daughter: http://www.veganoutreach.org/enewsletter/20080611.html. If huge numbers of parents and authority figures send this messasge, eventually it becomes the norm.
In a “travelogue” blog post a couple of years, I wrote:
People so quickly turn aggressive and “me against you” combative in their cars. Yet they also respond graciously to the smallest kindnesses, and often return the favor. It’s as if we’re mostly teetering between our better natures and our worser natures, and the slightest push from either direction determines which side will predominate.
The Milgram experiments, with chilling simplicity, show our perpensity for violence, even sadism, and our willingness to do as told, or go along with the crowd. Combine that with our capacity to get used to almost any wrongdoing to others, no matter how horrible, and you’ve got a foundation for many of the institutional horrors throughout history.
But we also have great capacity to do good. I believe we have natural affinities toward animals - most people look away in horror, disgust, and sadness at even very brief mentions of farm animal abuse and suffering. The vast majority of people don’t resue rabbits but I have yet to tell one person about our rabbit being found on the side of a busy highway, abandoned, who didn’t shake their heads in disgust and empathy. We all desire peace and friendship. There are just as many tales of self-sacrifice, heroism, and kindness as there are of mass-murder, oppression, and greed. As illustrated by the hired peers in the Milgram experiments, each of us has a chance - through example and inspired advocacy - to define what is right, what is acceptable behavior, and the goals to which we should strive. We each influence the world. I’ll bet every vegan activist knows grown adults who have said to us, with sincerity, “You’d be real proud of me” when they order a vegetarian meal at a restaurant or buy soy milk. The phrasing and tone are child-like; they admire our moral integrity and look for our approval. Each of us can be a Milgram - or a peer - and use our power for good. Compassion begets compassion. Sea changes do happen. What is commonplace in a society one century may be rare and widely condemned the next. That is our challenge, our hope, and our obligation.
~ Recent blog post: To Meat-Eaters: Easy Ways to Reduce Meat Consumption While Retaining Your Comfort Foods, Part 39 at http://www.animalwritings.com ~
“When physical immediacy with the subject being shocked increased, ‘compliance’ decreased. Likewise, as the authority’s physical proximity decreased, so did the compliance”
We learned this in college. If a student was acting up, you don’t say anything, just go stand by them and the bad behavior ends
Meat-eaters and some vegans have the mob mentality. They believe “Warwak is giving vegetarians and vegans a bad name” - What a joke. Vegetarians already have a bad name. I have heard every meat-eater argument and when they all fail, they cry, ” you might be right, but we don’t like your delivery method so we are justified in ignoring your message.” These same people have used every excuse in the book to avoid change. All lies by the way. Absurd evil lies. I do not give in to peer pressure or name calling. Do they really believe I will change my message for their friendship? I don’t want to be friends with these same people. This is the oldest trick in the book. Attack the person, not the problem. These same people believe vegans should be seen but not be heard, after all, we might break their consciousness while they are eating. The heard mentalities fight to stay disconnected at all costs - even their own children’s lives! I SAY THEY GIVE THE HUMAN RACE A BAD NAME!
This basic aspect of human nature has been used against progress in many areas, including the fight against global warming. Let the truth be told in all is many hues!