burger

Question 1

Issue and debate: How has psych knowledge dev over time? (link to burger)

Answer 1

Milgrams study was controversial due to its ethics. ppts in his study under high levels of stress. 150v crucial point- where learner protests and demands to be realised (point from pilot study where they guessed how far they would go) 6/14 ppts who stopped before 450v stopped at150v. 79& of the people who went past 150v went all the way to the end suggests knowing what people do at 150v predicts continuation. Burger also points out after ppts decides whether to go forward from 150v when they stop the study ppts still experience extreme stress which Milgrams ppts exp in the later part

Question 2

What was the aim of Burgers study?

Answer 2

To find out if the same results as Milgram’s 1963 study re-occur when the study is replicated with modern participants in 2009. Also, to see if personality variables like empathy and locus of control influence obedience. Finally, to see if the presence of a disobedient “model” makes a difference to obedience levels.

Question 3

What was the IV in Burgers study?

Answer 3

Base condition compared to model refusal condition

Question 4

What is the independent measure?

Answer 4

Independent group design- compares 2009 ppt with 1960s ppp and compares control group with disobedient model group

Question 5

What was the DV in Burgers study?

Answer 5

Obedience is measured by how many volts the last shock to be delivered was - before the participant refused to go on, exhausted all the “prods” or reached 150V (whichever happened first)

Question 6

What was Burgers sample and sampling technique?

Answer 6

Volunteer sampling, ad in paper and online, ppts paid $50 before study took place,(more ppt before screening + psych students immediately excluded) 29 m and 41f age range 20-81 and mean age of 42.9 and range of occupations and ethnicities

Question 7

Key differences between Burgers and Milgram’s study

Answer 7

Complicated screening which improved ethics, male and females, winder age range and ethnicities, Milgram gave a sample shock of 45v wheras Burger gave 15v

Question 8

Describe Burgers screening process

Answer 8

Psych students x because validity of Burgers results would be affected as they would know what Milgram found and may alter their behaviour. Questionnaire about Ppts physical, mental health and childhood trauma 30% excluded. Questionnaires demographic, empathy, locus of control, anxiety, control, depression. Then a structured interview- neuropsychiatric interview

Question 9

Procedure of Burgers study (baseline)

Answer 9

Initial set up same between 2 conditions, told they could withdraw and keep money, told it was to ‘investigate the effect of punishment on learning’, drawing of rigged lots, both sign consent forms. Learner was put into adjacent room and teacher witnessed electrode on learners wrist and told to read 25 words and each wrong answer will get a shock and increases with every wrong answer. Confederate reveals they have a heart problem like variation 5. Sample shock of 15v and same 4 verbal prods

Question 10

Results of Burgers BC

Answer 10

75v pre-recorded grunts heard, 150v pre-recorded learner voice says ‘Get me out of here please my heart is bothering me’. 12 ppt/30% stopped at 150v and 28 ppts/70% said they would continue. Obedience in Milgram’s V5- 82% no statistical difference between this condition and Milgram’s similar condition

Question 11

Procedure in modelled refusal condition

Answer 11

2 confederates, one is teacher 1 and other is learner, ppt is teacher 2. Teacher 1 takes lead same audio script from baseline. At 75v grunting heard teacher 1 hesitates, 90v teacher 1 says ‘ Idk about this’, experimenter uses a prod and teacher 1 refuses and pushes a chair back and teacher 2 carries on

Question 12

Results of modelled refusal

Answer 12

11ppts /36% stopped at 150v , 19ppts /63% prepared to continue. No statistical difference between 2 conditions

Question 13

Individual differences results;

Answer 13

-Gender= none
-Empathy=Higher empathy more reluctance to continue, didn’t decrease obedience
-*hypothesis high internal= decrease obedience, correlation only in base condition. Presence of dissenting model reduced effect perhaps triggered a me vs him between ppt and confederate teacher

Question 14

Burgers conclusions:

Answer 14

Milgram’s results still stand- people are influenced by situational factors to obey authority figure even if it goes against their morals. Burger makes assumption if they’re willing to go past 150v they would go to 450v. Model refusal results similar to BC against SIT suggest impact of authority figure lessened if teacher had an ally

Question 15

Ethics in Burgers study

Answer 15

2 step screening process excluding vulnerable people ,told twice they could withdraw and keep money, monitored by a clinical psychologist who was told to end the study if any signs of excessive stress and approved by Santa Clara uni review board

Question 16

Generalisability PEEC

Answer 16

A strength of Burger’s sample of 70 people is that it’s larger than Milgram’s sample of 40. It also covers a wider age-range eg Burgers range is 20-81 and Milgram’s was 20-50. In addition Burgers sample had both men and woman with 21m and 49f compared to Milgrams all 40 men, Burger also had a range of ethnicities compared to Milgrams all white sample from New Haven. This means Burger’s findings are more generalisable to the wider society compared to Milgrams. However Burger did end up excluding 30% of his orginal sample through his screening process. For example, people who were psychology students, or could be deemed vulnerable due to poor mental health so this might have affected his results. (this was done bc of ethical considerations)

Question 17

Reliability PEEC

Answer 17

One strength is that Milgram’s study was high in reliability which means the study can replicated to give consistent results. This is because Burger followed the standardised procedures, which were the same from Milgram’s study. For example, the same ‘prods’ said by the experimenter to encourage the obedience from the ppt were ‘please continue,the experiment requires that you continue’ were standardised meaning that Burger could replicate much of Milgrams OG study. This increases the scientific credibility of Burger’s research due to following these strict procedures. However, it could be argued Burger didn’t exactly replicate Milgram’s study which was due to the ethical issues. For example, Burger had to stop the experiment at 150v instead of going up to Milgram’s 450v, meaning Burger had made the bold assumption of 150v being the point of no return where if ppt were willing to past 150v they would go to 450v.

Question 18

PEEC Applications

Answer 18

There is a strong level of applications as a result of Burger’s study like insight into modern day levels obedience, and showing us it’s possible to conduct a highly unethical study in an ethical way without compromising scientific integrity we can also test people for locus of control to identify those who are most likely to be disobedient. For instance, people with a strong need to be in control are less likely to take orders. SIT might suggest strategies for increasing the probability of influence on these people to be obedient. However, this might be an issue in relation to social control, For example, is it right to try and manipulate people into being obedient through testing their locus of control.

Question 19

PEEC validity (ecological)

Answer 19

One weakness of Burger’s study is that it may be considered low in ecological validity, likewise to Milgram’s study which Burger was trying to replicate. This is because, it took place in an artificial environment, a laboratory at the Santa Clara Uni, and task they were asked to do was to deliver electric shocks for every incorrect word pair, which was not an everyday task therefore an artificial task. Therefore, it may be that the findings of the research will not necessarily generalise to the real world, especially if the ppts suspected that the electric shocks were not real. However, other research has shown that high levels of obedience can be found in the real world. For example, Hofling found 92% of nurses were willing to admit a fatal dose of medicine because the doctor ordered them to do so.

Question 20

Ethics PEEC

Answer 20

One strength of the study is that it is regarded to be highly ethical due to being approved by the Santa Clara Uni ethics panel, and Burger ensuring a thorough screening processes to avoid harming vulnerable people. For example, Burger had an intensive 2 step screening processing with questionnaires which took out 30% of his original ppts to avoid harming vulnerable people which may be why the panel also approved and did not shut down the study. This ensured that the ethical issue of ppts being harmed was dismissed due to strict precautions Burger took the experimenter was also a trained clinical psychologist who was trained to look out for any excessive stress exhibited from the ppt. This meant that the ppt in Burger’s study did not suffer from any distress that they did in Milgram’s. However it can be argued Burger still had some ethical issues. For example, he still used deception when telling the ppt the aim of the study was to see the effect of punishment on learning.