Milgram shock-study imaginal replication: how far do you think you would go?

Abstract Online adult participants (N = 414) read a gripping first-person account of the classic 1963 Milgram shock study and were asked to predict the responses of both themselves and “the average person”. Prior to making predictions, half were told that 65% of participants exhibited complete obedience throughout the duration of the original study, whereas another half were given no information about the results. In general, participants predicted much less obedience than was shown in the actual Milgram study. In addition, consistent with the better-than-average effect, participants predicted significantly more personal disobedience in response to the scenario compared to their average person predictions. Prior knowledge of the Milgram study did not significantly impact participants’ predictions about their own behavior in an identical scenario. These results suggest that adults are unable or unwilling to incorporate social scientific research, specifically the Milgram obedience findings, into perceptions of their own likely behavior.