Milgram's Obedience Study- social influence

Question 1

sample

Answer 1

40 American males aged 20-50

Question 2

Aim

Answer 2

How far will someone go to follow authority when it involves hurting others.—> tried to explain the behaviour of Germans during the Holocaust

Question 3

where was the study conducted

Answer 3

Yale university

Question 4

identify the 4 different prods given by the researcher when the ppt tried to ask questions

Answer 4

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”

Question 5

How did the researchers convince the participants of the reality of the study

Answer 5

1. the participants took part one at a time
2. a cover story was used to justify the procedure
3. slips of paper were drawn from a hat to determine roles. this was fixed so that the ppt always got teacher
4. participants were told that no permanent tissue damage would be caused

Question 6

describe the task

Answer 6

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

Question 7

how many people were fully obedient going up to 450 V?

Answer 7

65%

Question 8

100% of ppts delivered shocks up to…

Answer 8

300V

Question 9

Identify some qualitative results

Answer 9

ppts showed signs of distress, groaning, digging nails into palm, and 3 have “full blown uncontrollable seizures”

Question 10

How many ppts stopped at 300V

Answer 10

5 ppts… 15%

Question 11

what were Milgram’s student’s initial predictions

Answer 11

only 3% would continue to 450V

Question 12

After the Debrief how many ppts said they were glad to have taken part

Answer 12

84%

Question 13

How many variations where there and how many ppts in total

Answer 13

636 ppts in 18 variations

Question 14

Outline Milgram’s uniform variation

Answer 14

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%

Question 15

Outline Milgram’s Change of location Variation

Answer 15

when set in a rundown office instead of Yale university, conformity fell to 47.5%

Question 16

Outline Milgram’s Two Teacher Condition Variation

Answer 16

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

Question 17

Outline Milgram’s Touch Proximity Condition

Answer 17

The Teacher had to force the Learners hand down onto a shock plate when they refused to participate after 150V
obedience fell to 30%

Question 18

Outline Milgram’s Social Support Condition Variation

Answer 18

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%

Question 19

Outline Milgram’s Absent Experimenter Condition Variation

Answer 19

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

Question 20

EVALUATION-Strengths of Milgram’s Study

Answer 20

+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.

Question 21

EVALUATION- Weaknesses of Milgram’s study

Answer 21

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.