etic make-up and personal experience either facilitated their willingness to follow authority and ideology or prevented it. Many subjects in both the Milgram and Zimbardo studies refused to follow the orders or rules of the game. Those who refused tended to identify more with the victim and less with the a

ntally, she construed the team’s mission as deciding how to put “dangerous people” in jail while releasing the non- dangerous. “The reason for this,” Milgram contended, “is the way we make decisions. Judges have the best intentions when they make these decisions about risk, but they’re making them subjecti

ntally, she construed the team’s mission as deciding how to put “dangerous people” in jail while releasing the non- dangerous. “The reason for this,” Milgram contended, “is the way we make decisions. Judges have the best intentions when they make these decisions about risk, but they’re making them subjecti

ial psychologists. "They take the famous Asch conformity experiments, in which participants believe a group over the evidence of their own eyes; and Milgram obedience experiments, in which participants agree to electrocute one another at the experimenter’s request to show that people are sheep. "Psycholo