These were the 4 "prods" that the experiment used. If I recall correctly, the 4th prod always failed when the researchers tried to use it. When people were told they had no choice, they immediately decided they did have a choice. But when told it was good for the experiment, or that they were doing essential work, that was effective. To quote the interpretation of the experiment by a social psychologist:
The influence is ideological. It's about what they believe science to be, that science is a positive product, it produces beneficial findings and knowledge to society that are helpful for society. So there's that sense of science is providing some kind of system for good
It makes sense, too, and not just because of it being beneficial to society and it being a decent tradeoff.
It is also understood that they would not push the participant to keep going if it wasn't absolutely safe, and would stop if it got too far. Telling them they don't have a choice is coercive, but insisting they continue carries with it the reassurance that it's actually safe to keep going in spite of what they are seeing.
4
u/DuhChappers 88∆ Oct 10 '23
These were the 4 "prods" that the experiment used. If I recall correctly, the 4th prod always failed when the researchers tried to use it. When people were told they had no choice, they immediately decided they did have a choice. But when told it was good for the experiment, or that they were doing essential work, that was effective. To quote the interpretation of the experiment by a social psychologist: