In the 1960s and 1970s, classic social psychological studies were conducted thatprovided evidence that even normal, decent people can engage in acts of extreme crueltywhen instructed to do so by others. However, in an essay published November 20 in theopen access journal PLOS Biology, Professors Alex Haslam and Stephen Reicher revisitthese studies' conclusions and explain how awful acts involve not just obedience, butenthusiasm too---challenging the long-held belief that human beings are "programmed"for conformity.
    This belief can be traced back to two landmark empirical research ( 实证研究 )programs conducted by Stanley Milgram and Philip Zimbardo in the 1960s and early1970s. Milgram's "Obedience to Authority" research is widely believed to show thatpeople blindly conform to the instructions of an authority figure, and Zimbardo'sStanfordPrison Experiment (SPE) is commonly understood to show that people will take onabusive roles uncritically.
However, Professor Haslam, from the University of Queensland, argues that tyrannydoes not result from blind conformity to rules and roles. Rather, it is a creative act offollowership, resulting from identifying with authorities who represent vicious (恶意的 )acts as virtuous ( 善良的 ) .
    "Decent people participate in horrific acts not because they become passive,mindless functionaries (公职人员 ) who do not know what they are doing, but ratherbecause they come to believe--typically under the influence of those in authority--thatwhat they are doing is right," Professor Haslam explained.
    Professor Reicher, of the University of St Andrews, added that it is not that theywere blind to the evil acts they were committing, but rather that they knew what they weredoing, and believed it to be right.
    These conclusions were partly informed by Professors Haslam and Reicher's ownprison experiment, conducted in 2002 in collaboration with the BBC. The study generatedthree findings. First, participants did not conform automatically to their assigned role;second, they only acted in terms of group membership to the extent that they identifiedwith the group; and finally, group identity did not mean that people simply accepted theirassigned position--it also empowered them to resist it.
    Although Zimbardo and Milgram's findings remain highly influential,professor Haslam argues that their conclusions do not hold up well under close empirical scrutiny.
   Professor Reicher concludes that tyranny does not flourish because offendersare helpless and ignorant; it flourishes because they are convinced that they are doingsomething worthy.