In 1963 Stanley Milgram, a Yale psychologist, created an experiment examining obedience. This experiment has been questioned by many psychology professionals. A psychologist Diana Baumrind transcribes her feelings in "Review of Stanley Milgram's Experiments on Obedience." Baumrind, when writing the review, was working at the Institute for Human Development, University of California, Berkeley. In his review, Baumrind denounces Milgram for the way he treats his subjects, potentially damaging their self-image. However, Ian Parker, a British journalist who has written for the New Yorker and Human Sciences, believes that Milgram's findings still hold a significant place in today's society. In his article “Obedience” Parker focuses on the purpose of experiments, differing from Baumrind's emphasis on unethical theories of experiment. Baumrind believes that the setting was a factor that played against the experiment's results, and Baumrind and Parker both reference the experiment's unethical beliefs. they also dissolve the reference to Milgram's comparison to the Nazi Party during the Holocaust. When you call the experiment a game, you can capture Diana Baumrind's feelings about Stanley Milgram's experiments. In the piece Baumrind presents the unethical aspects of Milgram's experiments. He labels the laboratory as a nontraditional setting to conduct an experiment, saying, “the laboratory is unfamiliar as a setting and the rules of behavior are ambiguous compared to a doctor's office” (225). Throughout his article he takes the side of the subjects, explaining the way in which the subject is treated during the experiment. Baumrind believes they are not treated with the respect they deserve. He says that it is now normal in the sociopsychological field... in the middle of the paper... general variables and the clear reference to the Nazi Holocaust, the magazine was immediately accepted and sent to the printers for publication (231). In Heather Miller's online report on Stanley Milgram's linking of subjects' obedience to the Nazis, she explains the My Lai invasion as an example where Milgram's proposal is probably true (History of Psychology). The invasion of My Lai took place during the Vietnam War; American troops simply invaded a village, massacring over 350 Vietnamese men, women and children. Miller states that Milgram argued that military training was the reason for these soldiers' obedience. He says, “The purpose of basic training is to break down the concepts of individuals and expand them onto the group or unit. During this period the soldiers spend a lot of time in discipline. Following orders is the basis of soldiers' actions.”