Editing Milgram experiment (section)

===Ethics===
Milgram’s experiment raised immediate controversy about the [[research ethics]] of scientific experimentation because of the extreme emotional stress and [[inflicted insight]] suffered by the participants. On June 10, 1964, the ''[[American Psychologist]]'' published a brief but influential article by [[Diana Baumrind]] titled "Some Thoughts on Ethics of Research: After Reading Milgram's 'Behavioral Study of Obedience.{{' "}} She argued that even though Milgram had obtained informed consent, he was still ethically responsible to ensure their well-being. When participants displayed signs of distress such as sweating and trembling, the experimenter should have stepped in and halted the experiment. Baumrind's criticisms of the treatment of human participants in Milgram's studies stimulated a thorough revision of the ethical standards of psychological research.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Today in the History of Psychology &#91;licensed for non-commercial use only&#93; / June 10 |url=http://todayinpsychologyhistory.pbworks.com/w/page/127018286/June%2010 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190128082853/http://todayinpsychologyhistory.pbworks.com/w/page/127018286/June%2010 |archive-date=January 28, 2019 |access-date=January 27, 2019}}</ref>

Milgram vigorously defended the experiment. He conducted a survey of former participants in which 84% said they were "glad" or "very glad" to have participated; 15% chose neutral responses (92% of all former participants responding).<ref>{{harvnb|Milgram|1974|p=195}}</ref> In his 1974 book ''[[Obedience to Authority: An Experimental View|Obedience to Authority]]'', Milgram described receiving offers of assistance, requests to join his staff, and letters of thanks from former participants. Six years later (at the height of the [[Vietnam War]]), one of the participants in the experiment wrote to Milgram, explaining why he was glad to have participated despite the stress:

{{Blockquote|While I was a subject in 1964, though I believed that I was hurting someone, I was totally unaware of why I was doing so. Few people ever realize when they are acting according to their own beliefs and when they are meekly submitting to authority&nbsp;... To permit myself to be [[Conscription in the United States|drafted]] with the understanding that I am submitting to authority's demand to do something very wrong would make me frightened of myself&nbsp;... I am fully prepared to go to jail if I am not granted [[Conscientious Objector]] status. Indeed, it is the only course I could take to be faithful to what I believe. My only hope is that members of my board act equally according to their conscience&nbsp;...<ref>{{cite book |author=Raiten-D'Antonio, Toni |title=Ugly as Sin: The Truth about How We Look and Finding Freedom from Self-Hatred |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=j4ijAgAAQBAJ&pg=PA89 |date=1 September 2010 |publisher=HCI |isbn=978-0-7573-1465-0|page=89}}</ref><ref>{{harvnb|Milgram|1974|p=200}}</ref>}}

In contrast, critics such as Gina Perry argued that participants were not properly debriefed, leading to lasting emotional harm, and that many participants in fact criticized the ethics of the study in their responses to the questionnaire.<ref>{{cite journal |last=Perry |first=Gina |date=2013 |title=Deception and Illusion in Milgram's Accounts of the Obedience Experiments |url=https://www.researchgate.net/publication/317914282 |journal=Theoretical & Applied Ethics, University of Nebraska Press |volume=2 |issue=2 |pages=79–92 |access-date=October 25, 2016}}</ref>