Milgram Flashcards
What were the results of the study?
100% to 300v
65% to full 450v
Ps showed signs of tension showed they didn’t want to obey (eg sweating)
Level of pain Ps thought shock caused - 13.42
Explain the ethics in the study?
- Guidelines didn’t exist when expt was performed
Issues:
- Ps suffered distress, 1 Ps suffered a seizure
- Didn’t obtain informed consent
- Ps deceived about purpose of study
- Ps denied right to withdraw only 35% did
Sample representative?
Self selected sample, more helpful people so more likely to obey
Sample may not be a representative eg only open to Ps who live in that area and read newspaper
How does it relate to social area?
Assumption:
Social area emphasises power of situation and how situation has stronger influence than dispositional factors. Milgram’s study showed situation had impact on behaviour. Signs of tension -> didn’t wanna obey but situation had greater influence. At uni, 65% obey, but later 48% obeyed in run down office block. Suggests more prestigious situation had stronger effect on behaviour.
How does it relate to the key theme?
Ps shown to respond to authority with high rate of obedience even when it could harm another Ps. Shows power of situation in determining behaviour as signs of tension –> didn’t wanna obey
What was the procedure of the study?
- obedience measured by level of shock given
- sample is 40 males 20-50 gained from newspaper ad
- briefed that study was to investigate effect of punishment on learning
- ps the teacher
What was the summary of the study?
- paid 4.50 for time
- yale university
- purpose of expt - investigate effect of punishment on learning
What was the aim of the study?
To investigate how obedient people would be to orders from a person in authority that would result in pain and harm to another person
What were the explanations of the high level of obedience?
- Study at prestigious university
- Teacher volunteered
- Ps were paid
- Ps were assured shocks weren’t dangerous
Free will/determinism?
Ps showed free will by disobeying so situation cannot completely determine behaviour
What were the conclusions made from the study?
Obedience occurred bc:
- prestigious location so trusted experimenter as legitimate authority, 47% obeyed when location changed
- getting paid
how was the study similar to bocchiaros?
- both ps in each study were deceived
- ps in both studies were paid to participate
how was the study different to bocchiaros?
- milgram used an all male sample whereas bocchiaro used a student sample of males and females
- bocchiaro’s sample was much larger than milgram’s - 149 vs 40
validity in the study?
weakness is realism of lab studies:
conflict experienced by ps?
obedience and will not to harm others are deeply ingrained behaviour characteristics
