Milgram's Obedience Study- social influence Flashcards
sample
40 American males aged 20-50
Aim
How far will someone go to follow authority when it involves hurting others.—> tried to explain the behaviour of Germans during the Holocaust
where was the study conducted
Yale university
identify the 4 different prods given by the researcher when the ppt tried to ask questions
1.”Please continue”
2.”The experiment requires you to continue”
3. “It is absolutely essential that you continue”
4.”You have no other choice you must go on”
How did the researchers convince the participants of the reality of the study
- the participants took part one at a time
- a cover story was used to justify the procedure
- slips of paper were drawn from a hat to determine roles. this was fixed so that the ppt always got teacher
- participants were told that no permanent tissue damage would be caused
describe the task
T read out a series of word pairs to the L.
the T read the first word pair and then a variety of other words.
the L had to indicate which one of the 4 words had been paired with the first word
how many people were fully obedient going up to 450 V?
65%
100% of ppts delivered shocks up to…
300V
Identify some qualitative results
ppts showed signs of distress, groaning, digging nails into palm, and 3 have “full blown uncontrollable seizures”
How many ppts stopped at 300V
5 ppts… 15%
what were Milgram’s student’s initial predictions
only 3% would continue to 450V
After the Debrief how many ppts said they were glad to have taken part
84%
How many variations where there and how many ppts in total
636 ppts in 18 variations
Outline Milgram’s uniform variation
In the baseline the experimenter wore a lab coat as a symbol of his authority
in the variation the experimenter was called away because of a phone call,
a new experimenter who seemed like ‘an ordinary member of the public’ in everyday clothes instead of a lab coat took over his role
obedience fell to 20%
Outline Milgram’s Change of location Variation
when set in a rundown office instead of Yale university, conformity fell to 47.5%
Outline Milgram’s Two Teacher Condition Variation
Milgram’s Agency Theory, when ppts could instruct an assistant (confederate) to press the switches, 92.5% shocked to the maximum of 450 V due to less personal responsibility
Outline Milgram’s Touch Proximity Condition
The Teacher had to force the Learners hand down onto a shock plate when they refused to participate after 150V
obedience fell to 30%
Outline Milgram’s Social Support Condition Variation
2 other ppts(confederates) also teachers refused to obey
T1 stopped at 150V
T2 stopped at 210V
The presence of others who are seen to disobey authority reduces the level of obedience to 10%
Outline Milgram’s Absent Experimenter Condition Variation
When the experimenter instructed and prompted the teacher via telephone from another room, obedience fell to 20.5%
Many ppts cheated and missed out shocks or gave shocks with a lower V
Proximity of authority figure affects obedience
EVALUATION-Strengths of Milgram’s Study
+reliable- has been replicated, lab study is a controlled environment.+ cross cultural replication (Dutch participants)
Quantitative data
standardised prods
+Applicable - can explain obedience of Germans during the Holocaust.
EVALUATION- Weaknesses of Milgram’s study
Low Internal Validity
-people responding to demand characteristics as it had been argued ppts were “play acting”. Due to the Prestigiousness of Yale university, ppts did not believe the shocks administered were real.
Low Generalizability- only men from the USA
Low ecological Validity-Lacking mundane realism as the task is artificial, it is not a usual activity for people to be administering shocks
Low Temporal Validity-times have changed people may not be as obedient now
Unethical-ppts deceived
procedure lacks protection from harm—> ppts put under psychological stress.
Not informed of their right to withdraw.
