explanations of obedience: situational variables

Question 1

level of obedience in Milgram’s original study

Answer 1

65%

Question 2

proximity: same room

Answer 2

• teacher and learner were in the same room
• obedience rate decreased 40%

Question 3

proximity: orders over the phone

Answer 3

• remote instruction condition
• obedience rate decreased by 20.5%

Question 4

proximity: teacher put learner’s hand on the electroshock plate

Answer 4

• teacher hand to force the learners hand onto the electroshock when they refused to answer question
• obedience rate increased by 30%

Question 5

location

Answer 5

• Milgram changed the location from Yale University to a rundown building
• obedience rate decreased by 47.5%

Question 6

uniform

Answer 6

• changed the uniform of a lab coat to wearing everyday clothes
• obedience rate decreased by 20%

Question 7

AO3: research support

Answer 7

• Bickman (1974): had 3 confederates in 3 outfits ( jacket & tie , milkman, security guard)
• they stood in a street and asked people to perform tasks (e.g - picking up litter)
• people were x2 as likely to obey the security guard than the jacket & tie
  supports Milgram’s
• conclusion that uniform conveys the authority
• high ecological validity

Question 8

AO3: lack of internal validity

Answer 8

• Orne & Holland’s: criticised Milgram’s study that the ppts knew the procedure wasn’t real
• more likely that the ppts in the variations knew this as well due to the extra manipulation
• e.g : when the experimenter was replaced by a member of the public
• Milgram agreed the situation may have made ppts know that it wasn’t real
• unclear whether the results are genuinely due to obedience or due to demand characteristics

Question 9

AO3: Cross-culture replications

Answer 9

• Miranda et al (1981): found an obedience rate of over 90% amongst Spanish students
• suggests Milgram’s results aren’t limited to American males due to the replication
• Smith & Bond (1998) : replications have taken place in Western societies which is very similar to America
• can’t conclude Milgram’s findings apply to everyone

Question 10

AO3: control of variables

Answer 10

• he changed one variable at a time so he knew what had an effect on obedience at a time
• everything else remained the same over and over with over 1000 ppts in total
  s- trength as we know the findings are due to the change in variable

Question 11

AO3: ‘obedience alibi’

Answer 11

• Milgram’s findings support a situation explanation of obedience
• proximity , location & uniform are factors that influence obedience
• Mandel (1998): offers an excuse / alibi for evil behaviour
  offensive to Holocaust survivors to suggest Nazi’s were obeying orders & were themselves victims of situational factors