Lesson 7 - Explanations of Obedience: Situational variables Flashcards
What situational variables may affect obedience?
Proximity
Location
Uniform
Proximity
How physically close is the authority figure to you or you to the victim
In the original study, the teacher and learner were in an adjoining room, so the learner could hear but not see Mr. Wallace. In the variation, they were in the same room. Obedience dropped from 65% to 40%.
Another more dramatic variation involved having to physically move the learners hand onto an ‘electroshock’ plate when he refused to answer a question. In this touch proximity variation, obedience dropped further to 30%
In a final variation, the experimenter was in a different room and communicated by telephone, therefore there was a large proximity. In this remote condition, obedience dropped to 20.5%.
Location
Milgram’s original study was conducted in a Yale laboratory. Instead, he conducted a variation of the study in a run down building. Obedience fell from 65% to 47.5%.
Uniform
In the original study, the instructor wore a grey lab coat as a symbol of authority and character. In a variation, the instructor was called away because of a phone call, and was replaced by an ordinary member of the public (confederate) in everyday clothes. Obedience dropped from 65% to 20%. This was the lowest of the variations, showing that uniform is a very important factor in obedience
Bickman (1974)
Research support - Bickman (1974) gave orders to 153 randomly selected pedestrians in NY. The researchers were dressed in one of 3 ways:
- A suit (jacket and tie)
- A milkman’s uniform
- A guards uniform
They were given instructions like, “Pick up this bag for me” or “This fellow is over parked at the meter but doesn’t have any change. Give him a dime”
Guard - 80%
Milkman - 40%
Strengths of Situational variables
Research Support - Bickman (1974)
Cross cultural replications - Miranda et al (1981) found high obedience rates in Spanish students (90%) showing that these traits are not limited to American males but can be applied to different genders and cultures.
Control of variables in Milgram’s variations - only one variable at a time was altered, meaning that everything else was constant. The stud was replicated on 1000 participants in total, meaning that the studies are valid and replicable.
Weaknesses of situational variables
Lack of internal validity - Orne and Holland criticised the studies due to demand characteristics
The obedience alibi - David Mandel (1998) argues that using these situational variables almost makes them an excuse or ‘alibi; for evil or bad behaviour, and if you were a Holocaust survivor for example, it would be difficult to say that it was just because of someones uniform or proximity that these atrocities happened.
