ORIGINAL RESEARCH article
Front. Psychol.
Sec. Personality and Social Psychology
Volume 16 - 2025 | doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1613507
Becoming a Teacher can reduce obedience compared to being solely an Examiner. Agentic state and obedience in the Milgram paradigm
Provisionally accepted- Wroclaw Faculty of Psychology, SWPS University of Social Sciences and Humanities, Wroclaw, Poland
Select one of your emails
You have multiple emails registered with Frontiers:
Notify me on publication
Please enter your email address:
If you already have an account, please login
You don't have a Frontiers account ? You can register here
Studies of obedience carried out in the Milgram paradigm tend to report shockingly high levels of obedience from people who are ordered by an authority figure to eventually, if administer all required shocks, electrocute another person. In the psychology literature, the person who carries out these commands is called the teacher. The authors of the present article note, however, that the term "examiner" would be more appropriate here, since the study participant is limited to verifying the correctness of the responses given by the student, i.e. the person sitting behind the wall. It was assumed that if the participant actually performed the role of a teacher (and thus first taught the "student," and only then checked the correctness of the answers to questions), the level of obedience demonstrated would be reduced. The results of our experiment partially confirmed this assumption. In the examiner condition, 4 out of 40 participants (10%) refused to press all ten switches, meaning that 90% proceeded to 150V. In the conditions where participants had first taught the student, refusals occurred more than twice as often: 9 out of 40 (22.5%), with 77.5% reaching 150V. This difference, however, was not statistically significant. We also analyzed an indirect measure of noncompliance—the frequency with which the experimenter had to prompt participants to continue by reciting the standardized phrases prescribed by the procedure whenever participants expressed hesitation or refused to comply. These experimenter interventions were more frequent in the conditions where participants had previously taught the learner (Median = 0.5) than in the examiner condition, where their role was limited to punishing learner for his mistakes (Median = 0). This difference was statistically significant.
Keywords: Obedience, Milgram paradigm, teaching vs examining, social influence, Compliance
Received: 17 Apr 2025; Accepted: 29 Sep 2025.
Copyright: © 2025 Grzyb and Dolinski. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
* Correspondence: Tomasz Grzyb, athomek@gmail.com
Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.