contemporary study - Burger 2009 Flashcards
What was the two aims of burgers 2009 study?
To replicate milgrams 1963 obedience study whilst addressing ethical concerns , particularly in regard to participants psychological well-being
To see whether obedience is affected by gender as well as personality traits
empathetic concern and desire for personal control
What ethical improvements did burger make compared to milgrams study?
Implemented ethical safeguards
- thorough screening process
- giving participants the right to withdraw
- ensuring particpants were debriefed and given psychological support after the study
How did burger design the study to reduce the stress participants experienced?
Burgers study included a modelled refusal conduction where the experimenter and the confederate teacher both refused to shock the leaner
What was the procedure of burgers 2009 study?
- 70 men and women aged 20-81 volunteered for the study and signed a consent form
agreeing that they could withdraw at any time - participants were asked to administer shocks to a confederate who was pretending to be a learner if they got an answer on a memory test wrong
- shocks started at 15 volts and increased up to 150 volts
- once the participant reached 150 volts the confederate would protest but the experimenter would prompt the participant to continue
- the experiment ended either when participants showed signs of distress or at 150 volts
How did burger measure obedience in his study?
By assessing how far participants would go before they either refused to continue or reached the 150 volt threshold
What were the key findings of burgers study?
- 70% of participants were willing to administer shocks up to 150 volts ( similar to 82% in milgrams og study )
- findings suggest milgrams results still applied decades later
How was burgers study different to milgrams study?
BURGER!!!
- used lower max shock level (150 volts)
- had a more ethical design of screening and debriefing
- included a modelled refusal where the experimenter and confederate refused to continue
What was the modelled refusal condition in burgers study?
The confederate teacher and the experimenter refused to continue administering shocks after 150 volts. This was designed to observe if this would influence the participants willingness to continue
How did burger ensure his study was ethical?
- By screening participants for mental health and emotional stability
- obtaining informed consent, offering the right to withdraw at any point and providing a through debrief and counselling afterwards
Conclusion of burgers study?
People are still willing to obey authority figures in situations , even if it means harming an individual
- 70% of the participants were willing to administer shocks up to 150 volts
How does burgers study contribute to our understanding of obedience?
- Demonstrates that obedience to authority remains stringent overtime , even with modern ethical safe guards and Shows the influence of dissenters in reducing compliance
What role did the experimenter play in burgers study?
Provided verbal prompts to encourage obedience
Eg ‘ the experiment requires that you continue” or ‘please continue’
What was the impact of the modelled refusal in burgers study?
It had a significant impact in reducing obedience. Participants who saw both the experimenter snd the confederate refuse to continue were less likely to continue administering shocks themselves
How did burger address the cultural relevance of his findings?
Burger noted that his findings were consistent with milgrams original study suggesting that the human tendency to obey authority is widespread , regardless of cultural or historical context
How does burgers study support or challenge milgrams conclusions?
SUPPORTS: supports milgrams conclusions that people are highly obedient to authority figures in situations, even when the actions contradict personal morals
CHALLENGES: challenges study by implementing ethical safeguarding making the findings more applicable to modern ethical standards
