Milgram Flashcards
methodology ?
- controlled observation in a laboratory setting
- participants selected using self selected sample method
- adverts placed in new haven newspaper asking for volunteers to take part in research about memory and learning
sample ?
- 40 males between 20 to 50 years old
- range of jobs from postal clerks to engineers
- varied education background from unfinished education to doctorate
- each man paid $4.50 for participating even if study wasn’t completed
procedure part 1?
- took place in Yale uni
- real participant arrives and meets the other ‘participant’ - middle aged man called mr Wallace
- they also meet the experimenter dressed formally in a white lab cot
- experimenter introduced the ‘aims of the experiment’ and follows a script to explain the experiment is about learning and punishment
- draws a fixed slip of paper from a hat so the leaner is always mr Wallace
- teacher watched leaner being strapped into the electric chair in order to prevent excessive movement
procedure part 2?
- teacher taken into another room with experimenter and introduced to the shock generator labelled from 15 to 450 voltes ‘slight shock’ to ‘XXX’
- task administered by teacher was a paired associate learning task
- learner communicated by pressing one of the switches in front of him (no verbal communication)
- every time leaner got an answer wrong teacher had to administer the next level of shock on the generator
- no vocal feedback from the leaner until 300 volts when the learner pounds on the wall
- after this theres no sound learner stops answering
- teacher hesitates in giving the shock, experimenter requests obedience
- experimenters instructions continue - please continue, requires u to continue
- at the end of the research the teacher was thoroughly debriefed reunited with leaner and interviewed about their experience
quantitative findings?
- survey of 14 students before the study estimated only 0-3% of participants would deliver 450 volt
- all participants went up to 300 volts this is when 5 refused to continue
- 26 out of 40 went up to 450 volts
qualitative findings?
- many participants showed nervousness and a large number showed extreme tension (biting lips, stuttering, sweating)
- 14 displayed nervous laughter in post interview they said they were not sadistic and were not enjoying shocking the leaner
- 3 participants had full blown uncontrollable seizures and one had such a violent convulsion the session had to be stopped
conclusion?
this was not abnormal group of participants do most would behave in this way
- it was the situation that the participants found themselves in that caused them to obey
internal validity evaluation?
- orne and holland claims that this research lacks internal validity as the participants did not believe the electric shocks were real
- simply would not make sense that someone learning in an environment would receive fatal shocks
- therefore participants behaved as they were expected to behave due to the demand characteristics of the study
- however milligram claims 75% of his participants strongly believed they were giving someone an electric shock
external validity evaluation?
ecological validity = could be argued that this is a big issue due to the artificial environment
- means we cause generalise the findings beyond the lab setting
population validity = all male participants some argued that we cannot therefore generalise the findings to females
3 ethical issues?
- psychological harm
- deceived participants
- right to withdraw
psychological harm?
- failed to protect his participants from this as he placed them under great emotional strain
- baumrind claimed milgram caused psychological distress to his participants that cannot be justified
- milgram defended himself by saying that he didn’t know that so many would continue with the experiment and experience the distress shown and that participants were debriefed after the experiment and experience the distress shown and that participants were debriefed after the experiment
deception?
milgram deceived his participants he told them that it was an experiment on learning, and the learner did not actually receive electric shocks
- this deception led to a lack of informed consent as participants had applied for and consented to taking part in a study on learning and punishment
- milgram would have had to lie to participants to avoid demand characteristics however many would argue this deception was too great
social implications?
milgram defended himself
- he did attempt to debrief participants at the end
- he said he did consider stopping the study when he observed the behaviour of the participants but felt there was no injurious effects
- he also said that potential damage to the participants should be weight against the importance of the findings.
