Milgram Flashcards
Background
Following WWII historians suggested that the Germans must have had some form of basic defect that allowed them to blindly obey their authority figures and commit such atrocities.
Milgram wanted to test whether the Germans are different or if anyone is capable of being as obedient as the Nazi’s if they are put in a similar situation
Key Terms
Obedience
Compliance with an order, request, or law or submission to another’s authority
Key Terms
Authority
The power or right to give orders, make decisions, and enforce obedience
Key Terms
Experimenter
A person who performs a scientific procedure, especially in a laboratory setting, to determine something
Aim
To investigate the process of obedience by testing how far ordinary Americans would go in obeying an authority figure
Sample
- 40 people (wanted 500)
- All male
- All from New Haven, USA
- Aged 20-50
- Wide range of occupations (but no students)
Sampling method
Self-selecting - Ad in local newspaper, paid $4.50 for participation
Key Terms
Confederate
Someone who behaves as instructed by the experimenter
Procedure
Procedure
- Participants meet experiementer in lab coat + Mr Wallace (secret confederate of researcher)
- Participant + Mr Wallace get “randomly” assigned role (Participant always gets teacher, Wallace always gets learner)
- They see Wallace strapped into chair with electrodes on his arms
- In a different room, participant gets test shock of 45v
- Learner and teacher carry out paired-word task
- When Wallace answers incorrectly, participant told to shock him
- Voltage increases by 15v at every incorrect answer, starting at 15v up to max 450v
- At 300v, Wallace bangs on wall to show distress
- After 300v, Wallace stops answering questions
- Participant told to treat silence as incorrect answer and shock him again
- Wallace bangs on wall again at 315v then makes no noise for the rest of the experiment
- Experiment ends when 450v reached or participant refuses to continue
- “Prods” given if participant wants to stop during experiment
- Participants watched through one-way mirror
- Participants interviewed afterwards about reasons behind their actions
Procedure
Paired-word task
- Teacher reads series of word pairs to learner
- Teacher then reads a single word and 4 options
- Learner decides which of the 4 words was originally paired with first word
Procedure
Prods
If at any point the participant says that they want to stop or they ask the experimenter for advice on whether to continue, the experimenter responds with a series of standardised prods:
* “Please continue”
* “The experiment requires that you continue”
* “It is absolutely essential that you continue”
* “You have no other choice, you must go on”
Findings
Quantitative data
- 100% of participants reached 300v
- 65% of participants reached the max 450v
- 14 participants showed nervous laughter
- 3 participants had ‘Full blown uncontrollable seizures’
Findings
Qualitative data
- Participants ‘observed to sweat, tremble, stutter, bite their lips, groan and dig their fingernails into their flesh’
- Quotes from participants:
- “I think he’s trying to communicate, he’s knocking”
- “Well it’s not fair to shock the guy”
- “These are terrific volts. I don’t think this is very humane”
- “Oh, I can’t go on with this”
- “He’s banging in there. I’m gonna chicken out. I’d like to continue, but I can’t do that to a man”
- “I’m sorry, I can’t do that to a man. I’ll hurt his heart. You take your money.”
Controls
- Fixed Lottery (“randomly” picking role)
- Experimenter and learner (same people used everytime)
- 4 Prods
- 300v learner response
- Test shock
- Word pair task
- Shock generator
Conclusions
- The situation produced strong tendencies to obey
- The situation cause emotional strain and tension on the participants
- Germans aren’t different!
Milgram’s explanations
- The experiment took place at Yale university, a credible institution with a good reputation
- The results from the study would be useful
- The learner had supposedly volunteered to take part
- Participants had volunteered and felt obliged to continue.
- Participants were paid, and so felt even more obliged to continue
- It was apparently by chance that the teacher was assigned that role. Meaning they both ran the risk of being the learner
- Lack of clarity about what would be over-stepping the limits
- Participants were assured that the shocks were not dangerous
Evaluation
Ethnocentrism
High ethnocentrism - Only took place in one city in one country
Evaluation
Reliability
- Internal - Lots of controls, standardised procedure
- External - 40 participants could be enough to establish consistent effect, but could be argued to be too small
Evaluation
Validity
- Ecological - People don’t often administer lethal electric shocks to each other in their daily life
- Population - All male, all from one city but wide age range, range of occupations
- Construct - Didn’t know aim of study so no demand characteristics, few extraneous variables
Evaluation
Ethics
Kept:
* Debrief - Participants told true aim of study and saw Mr Wallace was unharmed after experiment finished
* Confidentiality - No personal information known about participants
Broken:
* Deception - Participants not told true aim of study before taking part
* Informed consent - Participants not told true aim/procedure of study before giving consent
* Protection from harm - 3 participants had seizures, participants showed signs of distress and psychological harm
* Right to withdraw - “Prods” given made it seem like participants couldn’t leave
