It's listed under "
other variations". A paper by
sheridan and king.
en.wikipedia.org
Ok, but as I said, it's not a replication, despite claims. If you read the paper it's appallingly conducted too, to the absolute lowest and most unscientific standards (again with the "reality TV" level stuff), like saying, because people volunteered on the basis of free course credit, they eliminated sampling/selection bias, which is literally the opposite of the case! It's a truly insane thing to claim - you'd be ridiculed for that today. Rather, they selected for a bunch of people who:
A) Desperately wanted to pass the course.
and
B) Didn't think that they could pass the course without help, i.e. getting free credit for doing this, so were willing to risk taking part in 1960s-era psychological experiments, which were pretty consistently messed up. Or were lazy opportunists willing to take risks (low conscientiousness in psychological terms).
and I guess that actually adds
C) People who were willing to do/accept messed-up stuff, because they want to be involved with psychological experiments in the 1960s - and that's not just backwards-looking, people at the time absolutely wrote at length about how messed-up psychological experimentation had been in the 1950s and 1960s, and it only got worse in the 1970s as far as I can tell! So that's a significant self-selecting bias that also applies to the other "reality show" attempts.
Any student with confidence in themselves and their own abilities, any student who was, well, studious, and a lot of categories of people would simply not have volunteered in the first place. So they got, frankly, the dregs and the desperate. Exactly like reality TV gets. Then acted like this was a normal sample of college students.
They also faked all readings for the amounts they animals were receiving, and anyone who like, the slightest, just slightest grasp on electrical physics must have rapidly become aware of this. 450v sounds scary because 240v or even 110v at 13 amps can blow you across the room (or rather cause your legs to spasm in such a way that that happens - it's happened to me lol). SPOILER COVERING as Trigger Shield for anyone who doesn't like to think about animals getting hurt! They were using 0.2 milliamps I mean, good, less cruel, because no permanent harm was done, but also
I think bloody obvious when animals just dance around and bark/complain (rightfully!) rather being flung bodily by spasms or get similarly incapacitated - there's no doubt they could tell they weren't doing permanent harm. So contrary to the "real victims" claim, this was just another fairly obviously-fraudulent experiment.
If anyone ever wants to do this ever again, they need to survey the hell out of the "contestants", psychologically profile the naughty word out of them, and do it with like 1000 people, not 14, and further, they need to do it with a bunch of different people in charge, not just one guy who I think must have been insanely stern and patriarchal given the results this one got.