I don't think this study was too bad still unethical because the consent was not there but no one was actually physically hurt. Stress was created but a sense or remorse and concern was seen by many of the test subjects. They continued shocking even after the fake test subject was silent but many really were concerned and immediately requested that someone check on the other person. The test study done at Stanford was shocking. It showed a lack of restraint and sadistic side of many of the test subjects that where verify offensive to me. The humiliation and then the breakdown of the one prisoner was just morally wrong for me. The breakdown was real and the mental anguish was fault. It was so bad that even Zimbardo was beginning to feel mental pain. I'm not sure if the negative makes a positive on the prison study. Yes, it showed how people would react to a prison setting but not all prisons are like the one seen in the video. .
The Milgram study was replicated in a Dutch study in 1995, in this study 91% of the participants completed the questioning all the way to the end. Again, the individuals given the shocks where not really happy to do it but because the authority figure requested they continue they did so. Showing that there were a change in the number of people that would go all the way through till the end. The scholars are saying this could be a change in what is presented as being deviant. The Burger Study was done in 2009, showed some changes but in the end Burger states that it didn't matter when the test was done the test subject still end up doing the same thing and the results are one in the same with Milgram's study (Burger). The BBC tried to do a test study based on the Sanford Prison Study but it too came to an end before the termination date and seemingly it was due to the same reason Zimbardo stopped his study. In the BBC project they assured everyone that the same fate would not fall on them.