The evidence
Obedience to authority: the Milgram experiments
A man in a grey coat tells you to go on. The person you are hurting has asked you to stop. How far do you go?

Obedience to authority
Going on hurting someone because a person in charge tells you to.
What the study found
In Milgram’s Experiment 5, where the learner demanded to be let out at 150 volts, refused to answer at 300 and fell silent after 330, 26 of 40 men (65%) went on to the generator’s last switch, 450 volts. In the 1963 study, where the learner made no sound until he pounded on the wall at 300 volts, it was also 26 of 40.
Source: Milgram, S. (1963). Behavioral study of obedience. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 67(4), 371-378. doi.org/10.1037/h0040525
How to read this
These are the answers of particular people, asked in a particular way, at a particular time. A share of people is not a verdict: it tells you what they answered, not what is right.
Where the game asks it
The Reconstruction (When should you obey?). The game’s versions with family, age, consent and combined pressures are new comparisons written for it. They are not copies of the experiments, and no population percentages are claimed for them.
Play The Reconstruction Free. No account. Your place is saved on your device.
More evidence
- The trolley problem: what people actually answer
- The framing effect: lives saved or lives lost
- The identifiable victim effect: one voice against many
- In-group favouritism: your people first
- The ultimatum game: would you refuse an unfair offer?
- The dictator game: what people give when nobody can refuse
- Third-party punishment: paying to punish a stranger
- Omission bias: the harm you cause and the harm you allow
- Conformity: when everyone else gives the wrong answer
- Anchoring: the number you saw first
- Base-rate neglect: what a positive test really means
- The sunk cost effect: finishing what should be stopped
- The default effect: when doing nothing is the choice