contemp (Burger 2009)

Question 1

Aim

Answer 1

-to find out if the same results as milligrams 1963 study reoccur when the study is replicated with modern participants in 2009.
-if personality variables like empathy and locus of control influence obedience.
-if the presence of a disobedient model makes a difference in obedience levels.

Question 2

Iv
Dv

Answer 2

Iv- base conditioned compared to the modal refusal condition.
Dv- obedience measured by how many volts out of 165v the ppt goes up to.

Question 3

Sample

Answer 3

-70 ppts both male and female, randomly decided into conditions.
-volunteer sample recruited through newspaper and online ads aged 20-81.
-burger recruited a lot more ppts but screened many out including volunteers who had heard of milligrams original experiment, anxiety issues or drug dependancy or more than two psych classes.

Question 4

procedure

Answer 4

• test shock ppts receives is only 15v rather than 45v.
  -teacher reads out 25 multiple choice, if wrong experimenter directs teacher to deliver shock going up in 15v increments.
  -learner indicates he has slight heart conditions and experimenter replies shocks arent harmful. at 75v leaner makes sounds of pain and at 150v learner says he wants to stop and complains about chest pains. -experiment stops at 165v
  -in model refuses condition, a second confederate pretends to be second teacher, who delivers the shock with naive ppt watching.
  -at 90v confederate teacher says ‘I don’t know about this’ refuses to go on so naive ppt told to take over.

Question 5

Results

Answer 5

-70% of ppts in baseline condition were prepares to go past 150v compared to 82.5% in milgrams’
-compares results for men and woman however there was no difference, women were less likely to obey in the model refusal condition but not significant.
-empathy did not make a significant difference to obedience, however in base condition those who stopped at 150v or sooner did have significantly higher locus of control. not the case in modal refusal.

Question 6

Generalisability

Answer 6

• Burgers sample of 70 is larger than milligrams’ sample of 40.
  -it covers a wider age range (milligram 20-50 and burger 20-81)
• two thirds of burgers sample were women whereas milligrams were all male.
  -However a lot of people were excluded from his final sample; for example people with emotional difficulties or some education is psychology. This may have effected the results, whereas milligram used a wider range of types of people.

Question 7

Reliability

Answer 7

-By filming the whole thing, Burger adds to the inter-rater reliability because other people can view his participant’ behaviour and judge obedience for themselves
-further demonstrates how milligrams original procedure can be replicated as burger followed milligrams script wherever possible and used the same confederates every time, therefore can be carried out multiple times for accuracy.

Question 8

validity

Answer 8

-Because the participants were paid fully in advance, we can be fairly sure it was social pressure that made them continue shocking, not a cost/benefit calculation about whether they personally would gain or lose money.
-The task is artificial, in real life teachers are not asked to deliver electric shocks to learners. also it is a lab experiment.
-perhaps participants who were prepared to go to 165v would still have dropped out later. it is a huge assumption to say they would have continued to 450v. the modal refusal group, in particular, might have had second thoughts as the shocks got stronger.

Question 9

Ethics

Answer 9

-Burger reduced the test shock from a painful 45v to a mild 15v. He also stopped the study at 150v so he he didn’t force anyone to “go the distance” to 450v, which reduced many of milligrams ppts to tears (and three of them fainted)
- however burger still deceived his ppts just as milligram had done, the shocks weren’t real, the learners cries were a tape recording, the learner and second teacher were confederates.
_he did not get informed consent although he did debrief ppts afterwards and didn’t allow time to pass beforehand.
- the ppts were warned three times that they were allowed to withdraw at any point and still keep the $50
- experimenter was a clinical psychologist, skilled in spotting distress.

Question 10

Application

Answer 10

The study demonstrates how obedience to authority works, influence of others and situational factors. and can be used to increase obedience in settings like schools and workplaces and prisons.
-Authority figures should wear symbols of authority (uniforms) and justify their authority with reference to a greater good