Milgram's Scotch Verdict on TV--A Retrial.
ResearchPublished 1974
An evaluation, by the former science adviser and senior research coordinator to the Surgeon General's Scientific Advisory Committee on Television and Social Behavior, of a series of experiments directed by Stanley Milgram, reported in S. Milgram and R. L. Shotland, [Television and Antisocial Behavior: Field Experiments]. Exposure to portrayals of antisocial behavior on television was manipulated, and subsequent imitative behavior measured, with both viewing and behavioral measurement occurring in nonlaboratory "everyday" circumstances. The data are interpreted as supporting a "Scottish verdict" in regard to the influence of television on antisocial behavior: case "not proven." Sponsored by CBS, the research cost about $500,000, and is probably the unique instance of a network altering programming on behalf of science. Unfortunately, the experiments are poorly conceived, flawed, and largely irrelevant to the large body of prior research on television's effects--a very modest contribution primarily illustrating the difficulty of conducting meaningful and compelling field experiments on mass media effects. 13 pp. Ref.
Document Details
- Copyright: RAND Corporation
- Availability: Available
- Year: 1974
- Print Format: Paperback
- Paperback Pages: 13
- Paperback Price: $20.00
- Document Number: P-5248
Citation
RAND Style Manual
Chicago Manual of Style
Comstock, George A., Milgram's Scotch Verdict on TV--A Retrial. RAND Corporation, P-5248, 1974. As of October 10, 2024: https://www.rand.org/pubs/papers/P5248.html
Comstock, George A., Milgram's Scotch Verdict on TV--A Retrial. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation, 1974. https://www.rand.org/pubs/papers/P5248.html. Also available in print form.
This publication is part of the RAND paper series. The paper series was a product of RAND from 1948 to 2003 that captured speeches, memorials, and derivative research, usually prepared on authors' own time and meant to be the scholarly or scientific contribution of individual authors to their professional fields. Papers were less formal than reports and did not require rigorous peer review.
This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law. This representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for noncommercial use only. Unauthorized posting of this publication online is prohibited; linking directly to this product page is encouraged. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of its research documents for commercial purposes. For information on reprint and reuse permissions, please visit www.rand.org/pubs/permissions.
RAND is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.