Burger (2009) Flashcards
What screening process did Burger implement to ensure ethical treatment?
A two-step screening process filtered out participants who might experience undue stress.
How were participants informed about their right to withdraw?
Participants were warned three times in writing that they could withdraw at any time and still keep the $50.
What modification was made to the test shock?
The test shock was reduced to a mild 15V (instead of Milgram’s 45V).
Who conducted the study to monitor participants’ distress?
A clinical psychologist supervised the experiment to react appropriately to any signs of distress.
When were participants debriefed?
Participants were debriefed immediately, and the learner was introduced as healthy.
What were Burger’s main aims?
To determine if Milgram’s findings would still apply in modern times.
2. To explore how gender, personality, and modelled refusal influence obedience.
3. To examine the role of empathic concern and desire for control in obedience.
How were participants recruited?
Through advertisements and flyers, resulting in a final sample of 29 men and 41 women.
What was the age range of participants?
20 to 81 years old, with a mean age of 42.9 years.
How was the base condition conducted?
Participants were assigned the role of teacher via a rigged draw.
* The learner (confederate) mentioned having a heart condition.
* The experimenter prodded participants with standardized prompts.
* The experiment stopped at 150V or when participants refused to continue.
What happened after the experiment ended?
Participants were informed the shocks were fake and were immediately debriefed.
What was the key difference in the modelled refusal condition? (Modelled Refusal Condition Procedure)
A second confederate acted as Teacher 1 and refused to continue after 75V.
What role did the real participant play?(Modelled Refusal Condition Procedure)
They were Teacher 2, instructed to continue after Teacher 1 refused.
How did the confederate (Teacher 1) behave afterward? (Modelled Refusal Condition Procedure)
They sat silently, avoiding eye contact with the real participant.
What percentage of participants continued past the 150V mark in the base condition? (Modelled Refusal Condition Procedure)
70% of participants.
What percentage continued in the modelled refusal condition? (Modelled Refusal Condition Procedure)
63.3%, which was not significantly different from the base condition.
