Milgram Flashcards
Aims
Aimed to understand germans who followed harmful orders during ww2
Procedure
Selected sample of 40 American men between 20-50 years theough a newspaper advert about a memory experiment that will pay them 4.50 dollars
Told that they can drop out anytime
3 roles: experimentor (confederate), learner (confederate) , teacher (particpant)
Learner strapped in a chair witg electrodes and the teacher is told to give them shocks starting from 15V That increases with 15V each time till 450 V everytime the learner gets mistakes on the learning task given to them
If the teacher retaliates , experimentor gives a series of 4 prods with prod 1- please continue, prod 4- you have no choice , you must go on.
315V- learner bangs on wall then ends up giving no response afterwards
Findings
65 percent -450V 100 percent- 300V 12.5 percent dropped out Heavy signs of psychological distress - biting, digging into nails, sweat, nervous laughter 3 ppts had full seizures
Conclusion
Suggests that Americans are surprisingly obedient towards legitimate authority
Strength.1
Standardised procedure, so its very replicable, two confederates are always used
Weakness.1
Competing arguement Gina perry (2012)argues that experimentors given as many as 20 prods during an experiment , showing that the experiments arent as standardised as it seems
Experimentors deviate from the script sometimes
Weakness.2
Task didnt make sense
Orne + Holland states rhat particpants knew the shocks werent real but went along with it , film showing that particpants questioned why the experimentor wasnt as concerned over the learner and why the experimentor didnt do the experiment themselves.
This questions the internal validity , suggests rhat particpants couldve showed demand charectoristics
Gina perry supports this as they suggested that film showed ppts questioning authenticity of experiment
Ethical issues
Lack of protection of harm, participants showed clear psychological stress as 3 ppts had full blown seizures.
Ppts also showed nervous laughter, sweating , trembling, digging nails into hands.
Deception, participants werent told the aims of the experiment.
Ppts are also unable to withdraw from experiment with usage of prods rhat state they “must go on”
Perry (2012) suggests that some particpants believed the learner had even died
Exp 10:rundown office block
Ppts told that experiment would be done in a prestiguous law firm.
Done in a rundown office block
Ppts questioned legitimacy of the experiment and their safety
47.5 percent of ppts showed obedience
Exp 10: ordinary man gives orders
Experimentor leaves room and chooses a particpant ( confederate) to carry out orders
80 pervent of people refused
20 pervent showed obedience
Exp 7: telephonic instructions
Experimentor gives instrcutions over phone , 22.5% showed obedience towards the experimentor
Ppts lied on phone about the level of shocks they were giving
Defiant particpants became obedient when the experimentor entered back into the room
Presence of experimentor affects obedience
Exp 10 strength
Used not only quantitive data hut qualititive data through the usage of audio notes which allows a further insight into what the particpants wanted.
Exp 7 strength
Research support : Jackson 1990, field experiment in New york zoo, when the zoo keeper wasnt present but in an adjacent room, zoo goers drastically became more defiant and started leaning on the rails as rhey were advised not to, shows milgrams viewthat physical proximity affects obedience to be true
Negative of variation studies
Carried out over 900 months, this couldve gotten the participants to be exposed towards other particpants that may have done the experiment, causing them to know of the aims of the experiment
-shows a lack of internal validity
Conclusion of variation studies
Shows that it isnt just due to the obedience of the particpant that situational factors can be into play aswell
