Milgram (1963)

Question 1

Aim (Milgram 1963)

Answer 1

To investigate how far people will go on obeying an authority figure

Question 2

Method (Milgram 1963)

Answer 2

Volunteers introduced by serious looking man in white lab coat (actor), he was put into an electric seat

Volunteers put into next room and given controls of Volts
15-60~slight, 375-420~severe

When learner made mistakes, the “teacher” was told to shock
Learner heard pounding on the wall at 300V, after 350V, nothing was heard

Question 3

Basics (Milgram 1963)

Answer 3

Lab experiment, voluntary sample told it was for “memory and learning”

Yale uni, academic, scientific and daunting

Question 4

Results (Milgram 1963)

Answer 4

65% obeyed giving shocks up to 450V

100% gave at least 300V

Those who went to 350V went to 450V

Question 5

Conclusion (Milgram 1963)

Answer 5

Despite ethical issues, results of this experiment needs to be re-emphasised

Rather than challenging the experimenter, participants continued to obey and knowingly harm others

Question 6

Strengths (Milgram 1963)

Answer 6

Ground breaking/influential study

Highly controlled (lab exp)

Replicated diff times diff places e.g. Mantell 1971 Germany

Hofling et al (1966)

Question 7

Weaknesses (Milgram 1963)

Answer 7

Ethical breaches: fledd

Failure to protect participants
Lack of right to withdraw
Emotional harm
Deception
Distress

Orne and Holland criticised
a- lacks internal validity (participants knew was fake)
b- lacks ecological validity (false situation, can’t generalise to real world)