Values and indirect noncompliance in a Milgram-like paradigm

References

• Altemeyer, B. (1981). Enemies of freedom: Understanding right-wing authoritarianism. Winnipeg: University of Manitoba Press.
   Google Scholar
• Alwin, D. F. (1986). Religion and parental child-rearing orientations: Evidence of a catholic-protestant convergence. American Journal of Sociology, 92, 412–440.10.1086/228506
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baumeister, R. F., Vohs, K., & Funder, D. C. (2007). Psychology as the science of self-reports and finger movements: Whatever happened to actual behavior?. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 2, 396–403.10.1111/j.1745-6916.2007.00051.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beauvois, J. L., Courbet, D., & Oberlé, D. (2012). The prescriptive power of the television host: A transposition of Milgram’s obedience paradigm to the context of TV game show. Revue Européenne de Psychologie Appliquée/European Review of Applied Psychology, 62, 111–119.10.1016/j.erap.2012.02.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bègue, L., Beauvois, J.L.., Courbet, D., Oberlé, D., Lepage, J., & Duke, A. A. (2015). Personality predicts obedience in a Milgram paradigm. Journal of Personality, 83, 299–306.10.1111/jopy.v83.3
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Benjamin, L. T., & Simpson, J. A. (2009). The power of the situation: The impact of Milgram’s obedience studies on personality and social psychology. American Psychologist, 64, 12–19.10.1037/a0014077
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berkowitz, L. (1999). Evil is more than banal: Situationism and the concept of evil. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 3, 246–253.10.1207/s15327957pspr0303_7
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Blass, T. (1991). Understanding behavior in the Milgram obedience experiment: The role of personality, situations, and their interactions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60, 398–413.10.1037/0022-3514.60.3.398
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blass, T. (1999). The Milgram paradigm after 35 years: Some things we now know about obedience to authority1. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 29, 955–978.10.1111/jasp.1999.29.issue-5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blass, T. (2000). The Milgram paradigm after 35 years: Some things we now know about obedience to authority. In T. Blass (Ed.), Obedience to authority: Current perspectives on the Milgram paradigm (pp. 35–59). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
   Google Scholar
• Bloom, P. (2016). Against empathy. London: The Bodley Head.
   Google Scholar
• Brannigan, A., Nicholson, I., & Cherry, F. (2015). Introduction to the special issue: Unplugging the Milgram machine. Theory & Psychology, 25, 551–563.10.1177/0959354315604408
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Browning, C. R. (1992). The path to genocide: Essays on launching the final solution. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Burger, J. M. (2009). Replicating Milgram. Would people still obey today? American Psychologist, 64, 1–11.10.1037/a0010932
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burger, J. M., Girgis, Z. M., & Manning, C. C. (2011). In their own words: Explaining obedience to authority through an examination of participants’ comments. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 2, 460–466.10.1177/1948550610397632
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Caspar, E., Christensen, J., Cleeremans, A., & Haggard, P. (2016). Coercion changes the sense of agency in the human brain. Current Biology, 26, 585–592.10.1016/j.cub.2015.12.067
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cheetham, M., Pedroni, A. F., Antley, A., Slater, M., & Jänke, L. (2009). Virtual Milgram: Empathic concern or personal distress? Evidence from functional MRI and dispositional measures. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 3, 29.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Costa, P. T., Jr, McCrae, R. R., & Kay, G. G. (1995). Persons, places, and personality: Career assessment using the revised NEO personality inventory. Journal of Career Assessment, 3, 123–139.10.1177/106907279500300202
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dambrun, M., Lepage, J., & Fayolle, S. (2014). Victims’ dehumanization and the alteration of other-oriented empathy within the immersive video Milgram obedience experiment. Psychology, 5, 1941–1953.10.4236/psych.2014.517197
   Google Scholar
• Dambrun, M., & Vatine, E. (2010). Reopening the study of extreme social behaviors: Obedience to authority within an immersive video environment. European Journal of Social Psychology, 40, 760–773.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dolinski, D., Grzyb, T., Folwarczny, M., Grzybala, P., Krzyszycha, K., Martynowska, K., & Trojanowski, J. (2017). Would you deliver an electric shock in 2015? Obedience in the experimental paradigm developed by Stanley Milgram in the 50 years following the original studies. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 1–7. doi:10.1177/1948550617693060.
   Google Scholar
• Elms, A. C. (2009). Obedience lite. American Psychologist, 64, 32–36.10.1037/a0014473
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Elms, A., & Milgram, S. (1966). Personality characteristics associated with obedience and defiance toward authoritative commands. Journal of Experimental Research in Personality, 2, 292–289.
   Google Scholar
• Ent, M. R., & Baumeister, R. (2014). Obedience, self-control, and the voice of culture. Journal of Social Issues, 70, 574–586.10.1111/josi.2014.70.issue-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Feldman, Stanley (2003). Enforcing social conformity: A theory of authoritarianism. Political Psychology, 24, 41–74.10.1111/pops.2003.24.issue-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fenigstein, A. (2015). Milgram’s shock experiments and the Nazi perpetrators: A contrarian perspective on the role of obedience pressures during the Holocaust. Theory & Psychology, 25, 581–598.10.1177/0959354315601904
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Funder, D. C. (2009). Naive and obvious questions. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 4, 340–344.10.1111/j.1745-6924.2009.01135.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gibson, S. (2013). Milgram’s obedience experiments: A rhetorical analysis. British Journal of Social Psychology, 52, 290–309.10.1111/bjso.2013.52.issue-2
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gibson, S. (2014). Discourse, defiance, and rationality: “Knowledge work” in the “obedience” experiments. Journal of Social Issues, 70, 424–438.10.1111/josi.2014.70.issue-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gilbert, S. (1981). Another look at the Milgram obedience studies. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 7, 690–695.10.1177/014616728174028
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Graham, J., Haidt, J., & Nosek, B. A. (2009). Liberals and conservatives rely on different sets of moral foundations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96, 1029–1046.10.1037/a0015141
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hafer, C. L., & Bègue, L. (2005). Experimental research on just-world theory: Problems, developments, and future challenges. Psychological Bulletin, 131, 128–167.10.1037/0033-2909.131.1.128
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hagenaars, J., Halman, L., & Moors, G. (2003). Exploring Europe’s basic values map. In J. Hagenaars & L. Halman (Eds.), The cultural diversity of European unity (pp. 25–58). Leiden: Brill.
   Google Scholar
• Haslam, N., Loughnan, S., & Perry, G. (2014). Meta-Milgram: An empirical synthesis of the obedience experiments. Plos One, 9, e93924.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haslam, S. A., & Reicher, S. D. (2012). When prisoners take over the prison. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 16, 154–179.10.1177/1088868311419864
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haslam, S. A., Reicher, S. D., & Birney, M. E. (2014). Nothing by mere authority: Evidence that in an experimental analogue of the Milgram paradigm participants are motivated not by orders but by appeals to science. Journal of Social Issues, 70, 473–488.10.1111/josi.2014.70.issue-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haslam, S. A., Reicher, S. D., & Millard, K. (2015). Shock treatment: Using immersive digital realism to restage and re-examine Milgram’s ‘obedience to authority’ research. PLoS ONE, 10, e109015.10.1371/journal.pone.0109015
   Google Scholar
• Haslam, S. A., Reicher, S., Millard, K., & McDonald, R. (2015). ‘Happy to have been of service’: The Yale archive as a window into the engaged followership of participants in Milgram’s obedience experiments. British Journal of Social Psychology, 54, 55–83.10.1111/bjso.12074
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hetherington, M. J., & Weiler, J. D. (2009). Authoritarianism and polarization in American politics. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511802331
   Google Scholar
• Hoffman, E., Myerberg, N. R., & Morawski, J. G. (2015). Acting otherwise: Resistance, agency, and subjectivities in Milgram’s studies of obedience. Theory & Psychology, 25, 670–689.10.1177/0959354315608705
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Homant, R. J. (2010). Risky altruism as a predictor of criminal victimization. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 37, 1195–1216.10.1177/0093854810378841
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Inglehart, R., & Welzel, C. (2005). Modernization, cultural change, and democracy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511790881
   Google Scholar
• Kohn, M. (1977). Class and conformity. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Legate, N., DeHaan, C., Weinstein, N., & Ryan, R. M. (2013). Hurting you hurts me too. Psychological Science, 24, 583–588.10.1177/0956797612457951
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lerner, M. J. (1980). The belief in a just world. New York, NY: Plenum.10.1007/978-1-4899-0448-5
   Google Scholar
• Lifton, R. J. (2000). The Nazi doctors. Medical killing and the psychology of genocide. New York, NY: Basic Books.
   Google Scholar
• Mermillod, M., Marchand, V., Lepage, J., Begue, L., & Dambrun, M. (2015). Destructive obedience without pressure. Social Psychology, 46, 345–351.10.1027/1864-9335/a000251
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Milgram, S. (1963). Behavioral study of obedience. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 67, 371–378.10.1037/h0040525
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Milgram, S. (1965). Some conditions of obedience and disobedience to authority. Human Relations, 18, 57–76.10.1177/001872676501800105
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Milgram, S. (1974). Obedience to authority: An experimental view. New York, NY: Harper & Row.
   Google Scholar
• Miller, A. G. (2004). What can the Milgram obedience experiments tell us about the Holocaust. In A. G. Miller (Ed.), The social psychology of good and evil (pp. 193–239). New York, NY: Guilford.
   Google Scholar
• Miller, A. G. (2014). The explanatory value of Milgram’s obedience experiments: A contemporary appraisal. Journal of Social Issues, 70, 558–573.10.1111/josi.2014.70.issue-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Miller, A. G. (2016). Why are the Milgram obedience experiments still so extraordinarily famous –and controversial ? In A. G. Miller (Ed.), The Social Psychology of Good and Evil (pp. 185–223). New York, NY: Guilford.
   Google Scholar
• Modigliani, A., & Rochat, F. (1995). The role of interaction sequences and the timing of resistance in shaping obedience and defiance to authority. Journal of Social Issues, 51, 107–123.10.1111/josi.1995.51.issue-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Packer, D. J. (2008). Identifying systematic disobedience in Milgram’s obedience experiments: A meta-analytic review. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 3, 301–304.10.1111/j.1745-6924.2008.00080.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Perry, G. (2013). Behind the shock machine. The untold story of the notorious Milgram psychology experiments. New York, NY: The New Press.
   Google Scholar
• Reicher, S., Haslam, S. Alexander, & Smith, J. (2012). Working toward the experimenter. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 7, 315–324.10.1177/1745691612448482
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reicher, S. D., Haslam, S. A., & Miller, A. G. (2014). What makes a person a perpetrator? The intellectual, moral, and methodological arguments for revisiting Milgram’s research on the influence of authority. Journal of Social Issues, 70, 339–408.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roccas, S., Sagiv, L., Schwartz, S., & Knafo, A. (2002). The big five personality factors and personal values. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28, 789–801.10.1177/0146167202289008
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rochat, F., & Modigliani, A. (2000). Captain Paul Grueninger: The Chief of Police who saved Jewish refugees by refusing to do his duty. In T. Blass (Ed.), Obedience to authority: current perspectives on the Milgram paradigm. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
   Google Scholar
• Slater, M., Antley, A., Davison, A., Swapp, D., Guger, C., Barker, C., … Slater, M. (2006). A virtual reprise of the stanley Milgram obedience experiments. PLoS ONE, 1, e39.10.1371/journal.pone.0000039
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Staub, E. (1989). The roots of evil. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Staub, E. (2014). Obeying, joining, following, resisting, and other processes in the Milgram studies, and in the holocaust and other genocides: Situations, personality, and bystanders. Journal of Social Issues, 70, 501–514.10.1111/josi.2014.70.issue-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tillman, E. (2013). Authoritarianism and citizen attitudes towards European integration. European Union Politics, 14, 566–589.10.1177/1465116513483182
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Voicu, B. (2012). Measuring child-rearing values. A research note. Social Change Review, 10, 47–70.
   Google Scholar
• Werhane, P., Hartman, L., Archer, C., Englehardt, E. E., & Pritchard, M. S. (2013). Obstacles to ethical decision-making. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511675911
   Google Scholar
• Wolfe, A. (2011). Political evil: What it is and how to combat it. New York, NY: Knopf.
   Google Scholar
• Xiao, H. (2001). Childrearing values in the United States and China: A comparison of belief systems and social structure. Westport: Praeger.
   Google Scholar
• Zeigler-Hill, V., Southard, A. C., Archer, L. M., & Donohoe, P. L. (2013). Neuroticism and negative affect influence the reluctance to engage in destructive obedience in the Milgram paradigm. The Journal of Social Psychology, 153, 161–174.10.1080/00224545.2012.713041
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zimbardo, P. (2007). The Lucifer effect: Understanding how good people turn evil. New York, NY: Random House.
   Google Scholar