Milgram ⚡️ Flashcards
What is obedience?
Form of social influence in which an individual follows direct orders from an authoritarian figure (higher power) who has the power to punish when behaviour is not obedient.
Who is Milgram and what was his aim?
Wanted to know if Nazis in WW2 were obedient due to situational factors.
What was the procedure of Milgrams study?
40 male participants were told to take part in a memory test at Yale university.
Experimenter –> Used 4 prods to encourage teacher to continue
Confederate named Mr Wallace (learner)
Roles were fixed so PPTs were always the teacher.
The teacher was to adminster a shock for every wrong answer the confederate got wrong and the volts increased by 15 volts up to 450 volts.
What were the findings of the experiment?
100% went up to 300 volts
65% went up to the total 450 volts which was enough shock to kill a person.
PPTs showed signs of stress and 3 PPTs had a seizure.
After a debrief, 84% were glad they took part.
Strenght OUI OUI 🥸
Evaluation of Milgram
Milgrams findings were replicated in a French TV show by Beauvois in 2012.
PPTs were paid to administer shocks to other ‘particpants’ who were actually actors.
80% went up to full voltage of 460 volts
Supports Milgrams original findings
weakness
Evaluation
Low internal validity:
Milgram reported that 75% believed shocks were genuine.
Orne and Holland 1968 believed that PPTs were acting which was supported by Perry in 2013 after listening to interviews 2/3 rd of those who didnt believe the experiment were disobedient.
Counterpoint from Sheridan and King as pets asked to administer real life shocks to a puppy.
100% went to max volts= females
54% of males went up to max volts.
Weakness cuz Milgram is a liar
Evaluation of Milgram
Ethical issues
Rife with deception as Milgram rigged the roles and didnt tell PPTs aim of the study.
Argued that deception was necessary for experiment to be realistic and avoid demand characteristics.
After collection of debreif, Milgram suggested that PPTs had no lasting damage and 84% were glad they took part in the experiment.
Proximity variation:
When learner and teacher were in the same room, obedience dropped from 65% to 40%.
Touch proximity when teacher had to move learners hadn onto the plate, obedience dropped to 30%.
More emotional vulnerability
Location variation:
When location was moved from Yale to a run down building, obedience dropped to 47.5% due to lack of status.
Uniform variation:
When role of experimenter was changed to an ordinary member of the public, obedience dropped to 20%.
Uniform symbolic of status
Bickman — guard =76% while pederstrian had 30% uniform gives legitimate sense of authority.
Evaluation of variations:
High levels of control, assessed each variable at a time.
Established cause and effect.
Study was replicated with 1000 PPTs.
Low internal validity —> guess aim of study easily. One and Holland (again)
Evaluations of variations:
Cross cultural replication.
Done in Holland where PPTs told to say stressful things to people they were interviewing who were desperate for a job (confederate)
90% obeyed
Applicable to other cultures.
COUNTERPOINT:
Smith and Bond = identified only two non western countries apart of research.
Not appropriate to generalise.
What is the agentic state?
Destructive authority is due to a person not claiming responsiblity as they believe they are acting on behalf of someone else.
They experience mental strain but feel powerless.
What is the agentic shift?
When a person shifts from an autonomous state to an agentic state.
Due to social hierarchy.
What is a binding factor?
Aspects of situation which allows person to ignore effect of their actions and reduces mental strain.
