1: Critics of Milgram's research have argued that the physical separation between the participant and the teacher in one room and the learner in the other made it easier for the participant to inflict the shocks. Do you think that made a difference? Why or why not?
2: The treatment of the participants in the study raised as much criticism as the results the study generated. Was it ethical to mislead them into believing that they were really inflicting pain on the learners? Why?
3: The participants were introduced to the learners as equal participants in the study-that is, volunteers just like them. Do you think that made a difference in the decision to keep increasing the voltage? Why?
4: What do you think Milgram's research tells us about our individual ethical standards?
5: Would you have agreed to participate in this study? Why or why not
6: Do you think if the study were repeated today we would get the same kind of results? Why?