key study: milgram (1963)

Question 1

aims

Answer 1

whether ordinary people would obey seemingly inhumane instructions, whether varying situational factors would affect obedience

Question 2

participants

Answer 2

40 volunteers by advertising it as a ‘memory and learning experiment’

Question 3

procedures

Answer 3

volunteers were told they would be the ‘teacher’ and the other participant (confederate) mr wallace would be the ‘learner’ decided by a rigged coin flip. the learner was placed in an adjoining room so the teacher couldn’t see them but could hear them

Question 4

procuedures pt2

Answer 4

each time the learner got an answer wrong the teacher was to give them an electric shock increasing the voltage each time, the labels below the 375V read ‘danger, severe shock’ and the last switch was labelled 450V. mr wallace kept getting answers wrong and acted in pain, after a while yelling about a heart condition and refusing to take part, the experimenter in the room told the teacher ‘the experiment requires you continue’, after 315V the learner was silent but the experimenter insisted it continue

Question 5

conclusions

Answer 5

ordinary people are astonishingly obedient to authority when asked to behave in an inhumane manner, the results were unexpected and gives the ‘only obeying orders’ defence some credibility and an individuals capacity for making independent decisions may be suspended in these situations

Question 6

variations

Answer 6

milgram conducted 18 variations of his obedience study

Question 7

uniform variations

Answer 7

the original study had the experimenter wearing a grey lab coat as a symbol of authority, a variation where the experimenter was called away by a phone call and replaced by an ‘ordinary member of the public’ in every day clothes saw obedience levels drop to 20%

Question 8

proximity variation

Answer 8

the teacher had to force the learners hand down on a shock plate when they refused to participate after 150V, obedience fell to 30% as they are no longer protected from seeing the consequences of their actions

Question 9

social support variations

Answer 9

two other participants (confederates) were also teachers but refused to obey, the first stoped at 150V and the second at 210V, their presence reduced obedience to 10%

Question 10

location variation

Answer 10

the experiment was moved to a set of run down offices rather than the impressive Yale University, obedience dropped to 47.5%

Question 11

two teachers variation

Answer 11

when participants could instruct an assistant to press the switches 92.5% shocked to the maximum 450V, when there is less personal responsibility obedience increases

Question 12

evaluations

Answer 12

a key insight into social behaviour, lack of ecological validity, small sample size, ethical breaches of psychological harm