Milgram Obedience Flashcards
Describe the main purpose of Milgram’s 1963 experiment.
The main purpose was to investigate whether individuals would obey authority figures even when the actions they were instructed to take were morally wrong.
How did Milgram manipulate the authority in his experiment?
Milgram employed two confederates, one acting as a legitimate authority figure in a lab coat and the other as a participant receiving shocks.
Define the role of the confederate in Milgram’s study.
The confederate played the role of a learner who would purposely give wrong answers, prompting the actual participant to administer electric shocks.
What was the maximum voltage participants were instructed to administer in the experiment?
The maximum voltage marked was severe and set at 450 volts.
How did participants react when the confederate showed signs of pain?
Only 12.5% of participants stopped administering shocks when the confederate showed he was in pain.
What percentage of participants obeyed the authority figure all the way to the maximum voltage?
65% of participants obeyed and continued the experiment up to the maximum voltage of 450 volts.
Discuss a limitation of Milgram’s experiment regarding ecological validity.
The experiment was conducted in a lab setting, which lacked ecological validity and may not reflect real-world situations.
Explain the significance of the ‘legitimate authority figure’ in Milgram’s findings.
The presence of a legitimate authority figure led participants to commit morally questionable actions, highlighting the influence of authority on behavior.
What was the participants’ perception of the pain experienced by the confederate, according to Holland?
Many participants did not believe that the confederate receiving shocks was legitimately in pain.
How did the participants’ background influence their perception of the experiment’s legitimacy?
Participants, particularly students at Yale, may have felt a sense of ignorance, believing the university would not allow such a barbaric experiment.
Describe the impact of the experimenter’s attire on obedience levels in Milgram’s study.
When the experimenter did not wear a lab coat, obedience levels dropped.
How did Slater et al replicate Milgram’s experiment?
Slater et al replicated the experiment using a virtual learner in a film.
What was observed in participants during Slater et al’s replication of Milgram’s experiment?
Participants still obeyed, although a heart rate recorder indicated distress.
Define the effect of communication method on obedience in Milgram’s variations.
When the experimenter spoke on the phone, obedience levels dropped.
How do Milgram’s findings relate to the legitimate authority theory?
Milgram’s findings support the legitimate authority theory, which suggests that people are more likely to obey authority figures.
What ethical issues were raised in Milgram’s study of obedience?
Ethical issues included breach of BPS Guidelines, deception, removal of the right to withdraw, lack of informed consent, and failure to protect participants from harm.
Explain the issue of deception in Milgram’s study.
Participants were not informed about the true nature of the experiment or who was actually involved.
What does the right to withdraw mean in the context of Milgram’s study?
Participants were allowed to withdraw from the study but were pressured not to do so.
How was consent problematic in Milgram’s obedience study?
Participants consented to a different experiment than the one they actually participated in.
What was lacking in terms of participant protection in Milgram’s study?
Participants were not tested on their ability to cope with the demands of the test and were not protected from harm.
Describe the impact of absent authority on obedience in Milgram’s Variation #7.
In Variation #7, the physical presence of the authority figure was removed, leading to a significant drop in obedience to 22.5%. Participants were more likely to give lower shocks, believing they were unobserved.
How did the setting of the study affect obedience in Variation #10?
In Variation #10, moving the study to a run-down office in Bridgeport resulted in a drop in obedience to 45.5%. However, Milgram concluded that the setting was less important than the status of the authority figure.
Define the role of the authority figure in Milgram’s experiments.
The authority figure, represented by Mr. Williams, plays a crucial role in influencing obedience, as seen in variations where their presence or status significantly affected participants’ willingness to administer shocks.
What was the outcome of Variation #13/13a regarding ordinary authority figures?
In Variation #13/13a, only 20% of participants obeyed the confederate’s suggestion to increase the shock voltage, indicating that the authority figure’s status and clear instructions are vital for obedience.
How did participants react in Variation #10 when the study was moved to Bridgeport?
Participants in Variation #10 showed more doubts, asked more questions, and some expressed intentions to complain, indicating a decrease in perceived authority.
Explain the significance of the telephone communication in Variation #7.
In Variation #7, communication with the authority figure was conducted over the telephone, which contributed to a significant decrease in obedience, highlighting the importance of physical presence.
What conclusion did Milgram draw from the results of Variation #7?
Milgram concluded that the physical presence of an authority figure is important for obedience, as removing this presence led to a notable decrease in compliance.
Discuss the participants’ behavior in Variation #10 compared to the original study.
In Variation #10, participants exhibited more skepticism and questioned the study’s ethics, contrasting with the higher obedience levels observed in the original study at Yale.
How did the absence of direct instructions affect obedience in Variation #13/13a?
The absence of direct instructions from the authority figure in Variation #13/13a led to only 20% obedience, suggesting that clear directives are essential for compliance.
Summarize the findings of Milgram’s variations regarding authority and obedience.
Milgram’s variations demonstrated that both the physical presence and the perceived status of the authority figure significantly influence levels of obedience among participants.
Describe the procedure used in Variation 13a of Milgram’s study.
In Variation 13a, Milgram used the 16 ‘rebel’ participants from Variation #13, continuing the study as if it were the same one. The confederate suggested swapping roles, where the confederate delivered shocks while the disobedient participant recorded the times.
How did participants react when they became bystanders in Variation 13a?
All 16 participants protested, with five attempting to unplug the shock generators or physically restrain the confederate. However, 11 participants (68.75%) allowed the confederate to administer shocks up to 450V.
Define the main conclusion drawn by Milgram from Variation 13a.
Milgram concluded that people are more willing to be by than to intervene against the abuse of authority, suggesting that the situation a person is in often influences their actions more than their individual character.
What role did the confederate play in Variation 13a of Milgram’s study?
In Variation 13a, the confederate took on the role of the shock giver while the disobedient participant became a bystander recording the times instead of administering shocks.
How many participants attempted to physically intervene in Variation 13a?
Five participants attempted to physically intervene by trying to unplug the shock generators or restrain the confederate.
What percentage of participants allowed the confederate to administer shocks to the maximum voltage in Variation 13a?
68.75% of the participants, which is 11 out of 16, allowed the confederate to administer shocks up to 450V.
Explain the significance of the statement by Stanley Milgram regarding human behavior in his study.
Milgram’s statement emphasizes that it is often the situation a person finds themselves in, rather than their personal characteristics, that determines their behavior in response to authority.
