This article probes the design history of Stanley Milgram’s simulated shock generator by comparing drawings and notes from Milgram’s archive in the Sterling Memorial Library at Yale with laboratory equipment and apparatus catalogues from the Archives of the History of American Psychology, University of Akron. By applying contemporaneous human factors engineering principles to the generator’s control panel layout, sequencing, and display optimisation, an argument emerges that suggests the tailor-made device had an influential role in facilitating the behaviour witnessed in the laboratory and generalised as obedience. Such an approach puts forward a new reading of Milgram’s experiment design, his penchant for dramaturgy, and reconsiders his generalisation of obedience to social authority.
BlassT. (2004). The man who shocked the world: The life and legacy of Stanley Milgram. New York, NY: Basic Books.
2.
BrennanA. (2004). Forecast. In ColominaB.BrennanA.KimJ. (Eds.), Cold war hothouses: Inventing postwar culture from cockpit to playboy (pp. 55–90). New York, NY: Princeton Architectural Press.
3.
BussA. (1961). The psychology of aggression. London, UK: John Wiley and Sons.
4.
CalvertM. (1962). The mechanical engineer in America 1830–1910. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins Press.
5.
CapshewJ. H. (1999). Psychologists on the march: Science, practice and professional identity in America 1929–1969. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
ChapanisA.GarnerW. R.MorganC. T. (1963). Applied experimental psychology: Human factors in engineering design. London, UK: John Wiley & Sons. (Original work published 1948)
8.
CurtisB. (2011). Dinosaur design. In AtzmonL. (Ed.), Visual rhetoric and the eloquence of design (pp. 245–276). London, UK: Parlour Press.
9.
EkmanG.FrankenhauserM.LevanderS.MellisI. (1964, May). Scales of unpleasantness of electrical stimulation. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 5, 257–261.
10.
ElmsA. (1995). Obedience in retrospect. Journal of Social Issues, 51, 21–23.
11.
FarishM. (2010). The contours of America’s cold war. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
12.
FrankenhauserM.FrobergJ.MellisI. (1965). Subjective and physiological reactions induced by electrical shocks of varying intensity (Report No. 182). Psychological Laboratories, The University of Stockholm.
13.
Grason-Stadler Behavioral Research Equipment Catalog. (1963). Archives of the History of American Psychology (Box No. 2, Apparatus Catalogs). The Cummings Center for the History of Psychology, University of Akron, OH.
14.
HesseM. (1966). Models and analogies in science. Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame.
15.
HookwayB. (2004). Cockpit. In ColominaB.BrennanA.KimJ. (Eds.), Cold war hothouses: Inventing postwar culture from cockpit to playboy (pp. 22–54). New York, NY: Princeton Architectural Press.
16.
IzardC. E.LivseyW. J. (1964, February). The effects of experimenter attitudes and feelings on response to painful stimulation (Unpublished Technical Report No. 21, Contract No. 2149(03)). Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN.
17.
JavitzA. E. (1952). Introduction to human engineering in product design. Electrical Manufacturing, 49, 90–95.
18.
LatourB. (1987). Science in action: How to follow scientists and engineers through society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
19.
Lee Valley Electronics Behaviour Analysis Apparatus Catalogue. (c. 1960s). Archives of the History of American Psychology (Box No. 2, Apparatus Catalogs). The Cummings Center for the History of Psychology, University of Akron, OH.
20.
MarshC. (2000). A science museum exhibit on Milgram’s obedience research: History, description, and visitors’ reactions. In BlassT. (Ed.), Obedience to authority: Current perspectives on the Milgram paradigm (pp. 145–159). London, UK: Taylor & Francis.
21.
MeisterD. (1985). Behavioural analysis and measurement methods. New York, NY: Wiley-Interscience.
22.
MeisterD.FarrD. E. (1966, September). The methodology of control panel design: Checkout and hazard control techniques (Unpublished report, project 8119). Performance Requirements Branch, Human Engineering Division of the Behavioural Sciences Laboratory, Aerospace Medical Division, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, OH.
23.
MeyerP. (1971, February). If Hitler asked you to electrocute a stranger, would you? … Probably. Esquire, 72, 73, 128, 130, 132.
24.
MilgramS. (1960a). [Untitled drawing]. Stanley Milgram Papers (Box 46, Folder 165). Yale University, New Haven, CT.
25.
MilgramS. (1960b). [Untitled drawing II]. Stanley Milgram Papers (Box 46, Folder 165). Yale University, New Haven, CT.
26.
MilgramS. (1961a). Correspondence. Stanley Milgram Papers (Box 43, Folder 127). Yale University, New Haven, CT.
27.
MilgramS. (1961b). Obedience notebook. Stanley Milgram Papers (Box 46, Folder 163). Yale University, New Haven, CT.
28.
MilgramS. (1961c). Specifications for simulated shock generator [Drawing]. Stanley Milgram Papers (Box 46, Folder 165). Yale University, New Haven, CT.
29.
MilgramS. (1963a). Behavioural study of obedience. Journal of Abnormal Social Psychology, 67, 371–378.
30.
MilgramS. (1963b). Draft of “Technique and first findings of a laboratory study of obedience to authority”. Stanley Milgram Papers (Box 55, Folder 17). Yale University, New Haven, CT.
31.
MilgramS. (1964). Technique and first findings of a laboratory study of obedience to authority. Yale Science Magazine, 39, 9–11, 14.
32.
MilgramS. (Producer & Director). (1965c). Obedience [DVD]. United States: Penn State University Audio-visual.
33.
MilgramS. (1970). Writings of others S-Z. Stanley Milgram Papers (Box 47, Folder 187). Yale University, New Haven, CT.
34.
MilgramS. (1974). Obedience to authority: An experimental view. New York, NY: Harper & Row.
35.
MilgramS. (1992[1977]). Some conditions of obedience and disobedience to authority. In: SabiniJ.SilverM. (Eds.), Individual in a social world: Essays and experiments (2nd ed., pp. 136–161). London, UK: McGraw-Hill Inc.
36.
MixonD. (1989). Obedience and civilisation: Authorised crime and the normality of evil. London, UK: Pluto Press.
37.
MorganM. S.MorrisonM. (1999). Models as mediating instruments. In MorganM.MorrisonM. (Eds.), Models as mediators: Perspectives on natural and social science (pp. 10–37). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
38.
NicholsonI. (2011). “Shocking” masculinity: Stanley Milgram, “Obedience to Authority,” and the “Crisis of Manhood” in cold war America. ISIS, 102, 238–268.
39.
NormanD. (2013). Design of everyday things. New York, NY: Basic Books.
40.
PerryG. (2012). Behind the shock machine: The untold story of the notorious Milgram psychology experiments. Brunswick, Australia: Scribe.
41.
PerryG. (2015). Seeing is believing: The role of the film Obedience in shaping perceptions of Milgram’s obedience to authority experiments. Theory & Psychology, 25, 622–638.
42.
PettitM. (2013). The science of deception: Psychology and commerce in America. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
43.
RussellN. J. C. (2011). Milgram’s obedience to authority experiments: Origins and early evolution. British Journal of Social Psychology, 50, 140–162.
44.
SleightR. B. (1948). The effect of instrument dial shape on legibility. Journal of Applied Psychology, 28, 170–188.
45.
SturmT.AschM. G. (2005). The role of instruments. History of Psychology, 8, 3–34.
46.
TavrisC. (1974, June). The frozen world of the familiar stranger. Psychology Today, 70–80.
