Milgram’s obedience studies remain psychology’s dominant explanation of Holocaust perpetration.

Evidence

The purpose of this chapter is to evaluate the adequacy of what has been, arguably, the most influential psychological account of perpetrator behavior during the Holocaust, the social-psychological approach of Stanley Milgram (1963, 1974). — Leonard S. Newman and Ralph Erber (eds.), Understanding Genocide, 589

Categorization

• XREF: Situates the chapter as a critique of the Milgram framework the reader is implicitly contrasting with Glick’s envied-outgroup argument. — connects to: Browning’s account of Holocaust perpetrators emphasized obedience and conformity — Leonard S. Newman and Ralph Erber (eds.), Understanding Genocide: The Social…, 316; Milgram’s obedience findings displaced motivational and personality explanations of genocide — Leonard S. Newman and Ralph Erber (eds.), Understanding Genocide: The Social…, 736; Milgram’s obedience paradigm was designed to explain Holocaust perpetration — Leonard S. Newman and Ralph Erber (eds.), Understanding Genocide: The Social…, 596 (+3 more)

Broader Connections

• Milgram’s obedience paradigm was designed to explain Holocaust perpetration #expands (0.85) — Leonard S. Newman and Ralph Erber (eds.), Understanding Genocide, 596
• Holocaust social psychology requires both ideological attraction and conformity obedience #complicates (0.85) — Leonard S. Newman and Ralph Erber (eds.), Understanding Genocide, 851
• Milgram’s situational account of construing oneself into obedience remains insightful despite pseudobiological framing. #corroborates (0.75) — John T. Jost and Jim Sidanius, Political Psychology, 3938
• Holocaust consciousness shaped Milgram’s identity before his research career #expands (0.75) — Leonard S. Newman and Ralph Erber (eds.), Understanding Genocide, 597