Contemporary: Burger

Question 1

Aim

Answer 1

To investigate obedience by partially replicating Milgram’s (1963) study to examine whether situational factors affect obedience to an authoritarian in a more ethical way having noticed that the experiment could probably stop at 150v (since the majority of people who give that shock continue anyway)

Question 2

Method

Answer 2

Participants responsed to an advert via flyers offering money to take part
Took part in a number of screening processes asking about mental health (6 questions), personality tests and an interview with a clinical psychologist
A sample of 29 men and 41 women.

Participants were randomly assigned to one of two conditions, but an attempt was made to keep the gender ratios in the conditions approximately equal.

Question 3

Procedure

Answer 3

Participants went through the same procedure as in the Milgram study (except it stopped at 150v).
Slight changes
Only 15v shock given
After participants pressed the 75-volt switch, they heard a small grunt (what Milgram described as “ugh”). Participants heard the confederate grunt after each successive shock, and each grunt was a little louder than the previous one.
When the participant pressed the 150-volt switch, he or she heard the confederate yell through the wall, “Ugh. That’s all. Get me out of here. I told you I had heart trouble. My heart’s starting to bother me now. Get me out of here, please. My heart’s starting to bother me. I refuse to go on. Let me out.”

Question 4

Results

Answer 4

Baseline 70% obeyed fully, slightly lower than the percentage who continued beyond this point in Milgram’s comparable condition (82.5%), although the difference fell short of statistical significance.

Question 5

+good sample

Answer 5

29 men & 41 women- uses both genders

Medium sample
size.

Question 6

+standardised

Answer 6

Replicable procedure

Controlled situation removes situational variables

Question 7

+low demand characteristics

Answer 7

since they didn’t know purpose

Question 8

+ethical

Answer 8

Harm- but less so than Milgram

Withdrawl ‘withheld’ (prods)…but not really- and
they were explicitly told 3 times

Question 9

-ethical

Answer 9

Lacked informed consent

Deception
Withdrawl ‘withheld’ (prods)…but not really- and they were explicitly told 3 times
Harm- but less so than Milgram

Question 10

-lab experiment

Answer 10

Low ecological validity/Mundane realism

Question 11

-sample

Answer 11

Self-selected- share characteristics