4. milgram's baseline procedure Flashcards
describe Milgram’s baseline procedure
40 American men volunteered to take part in a study, supposedly on memory. They were paid $4.50 upon arrival.
When each volunteer arrived at Milgram’s lab he was introduced to another participant (a confederate of Milgram’s).
They drew lots to see who would be the ‘Teacher’ (T) and who would be the Learner’ (L).
The draw was fixed so that the participant was always the Teacher.
An ‘Experimenter’ (E) was also involved (also a confederate, dressed in a grey lab coat).
Milgram’s study aimed
describe layout (shocks, what mr Wallace did after 300 volts)
The study aimed to assess obedience in a situation where an authority figure (Experimenter) ordered the participant (Teacher) to give an increasingly strong shock to a Learner located in a different room when he made errors. (in 15-volt steps up to 450 volts). The shocks were fake, but the Teacher did not know this.
· The switches were labelled from slight, intense and to danger - severe shock.
· When the teachers got to 300V, the learner pounded on the wall and gave no response to the next question.
· At 315V, he pounded on the wall one last time and gave no response until the end
The 4 standard prods the experimenter used to order the teacher to continue were:
- Please continue,
- The experiment requires that you continue,
- It is absolutely essential that you continue,
- You have no other choice, you must go on.
MILGRAM - conclusion
German people are not different.
The American participants in his study were willing to obey orders even when they might harm another person.
MILGRAM - baseline findings
how many went up to 300?, psychological effects, % up to the full 450?
Every participant delivered all the shocks up to 300 volts.
· 12.5% (five participants) stopped at 300 volts (labelled intesne shock).
· Milgram also collected qualitative data including observations such as: the participants showed signs of extreme tension; many of them were seen to ‘sweat, tremble, stutter, bite their lips, groan and dig their fingernails into their hands’; three even had full blown seizures.
65% continued to the highest level of 450 volts, they were fully obedient.
AO3 - strength of MILGRAM’S BASELINE STUDY
replication - jeu de la mort
One strength is that Milgram’s findings were replicated in a French documentary that was made about reality TV.
This documentary focused on a game show made especially for the programme. The participants in the ‘game’ believed there were contestants in a pilot episode for a new show called Le Jeu de la Mort (The Game of Death). They were paid to give (fake) electric shocks (ordered by the presenter) to other participants (who were actually actors) in front of a studio audience. 80% of the participants delivered the maximum shock of 460 volts to an apparently unconscious man. Their behaviour was almost identical to that of Milgram’s participants - nervous laughter, nail-biting and other signs of anxiety.
This supports Milgram’s original findings about obedience to authority and demonstrates that the findings were not just due to special circumstances.
AO3 - limitaton of MILGRAM’S BASELINE STUDY
low internal validty - orne & holland, perry (tapes)
One limitation is that Milgram’s procedure may not have been testing what he intended to test.
Milgram reported that 75% of his participants said they believed the shocks were genuine. However, Orne and Holland argued that participants behaved as they did because they didn’t really believe in the set up, so they were ‘play-acting’. Perry’s research confirms this. She listened to tapes of Milgram’s participants and reported that only about half of them believed the shocks were real. Two-thirds of these participants were disobedient.
This suggests that participants may have been responding to demand characteristics, trying to fulfil the aims of the study.
AO3 - strength of MILGRAM’S BASELINE STUDY
COUNTERPOINT - research support (Sheridan & King, puppies)
There is evidence confirming Milgram’s findings are valid.
Sheridan and King conducted a study using a procedure like Milgram’s. Participants (all students) gave real shocks to a puppy in response to orders from an experimenter.
Despite the real distress of the animal, 54% of the men and 100% of the women gave what they thought was a fatal shock.
This suggests that the effects in Milgram’s study were genuine because people behaved obediently even when the shocks were real.
AO3 - limitaton of MILGRAM’S BASELINE STUDY
alternative explanations - social identity theory (Haslam, prods)
Another limitation is that Milgram’s conclusions about blind obedience may not be justified.
Haslam et al. showed that Milgram’s participants obeyed when the Experimenter delivered the first three verbal prods. However, every participant who was given the fourth prod (‘You have no other choice, you must go on) without exception disobeyed. According to social identity theory (SIT), participants in Milgram’s study only obeyed when they identified with the scientific aims of the research (‘The experiment requires that you continue).
When they were ordered to blindly obey an authority figure, they refused.
This shows that SIT may provide a more valid interpretation of Milgram’s findings, especially as Milgram himself suggested that identifying with the science’ is a reason for obedience.
