Milgram's Research

Question 1

Milgram’s Original Research Procedure

Answer 1

Used 40 participants who responded to an ad for a memory test. Each met a confederate and the experimenter then drew for either teacher or learner but it was rigged so the participant got teacher. Teacher tested learners on word pairs and if they got it wrong they were electrocuted which increased by 15 volts if got it wrong. (read from a script, and not electrocuted). Scream, beg and go silent at 315 volts. If wanted to stop given verbal prompts.

Question 2

Milgram’s Original Research Findings

Answer 2

Every participant went to 300 volts, and 12.5% stopped there but 65% went to full volts of 450. Concluded under right circumstances ordinary people would obey unjust orders even when it caused them and others extreme distress.

Question 3

(O) Strength

Answer 3

Supporting research.
Hofling et al found 21/22 obeyed an order from a doctor to give a double dose of an unfamiliar drug.
Shows power of authority giving validity and generalisability.
However… nurses very busy and put in long shifts so could suggest that is why they obeyed.

Question 4

(O) Weakness (E)

Answer 4

Broke ethical guidelines.
Protection from harm and right to withdraw.
Emotional health not cared for.
However… 84% glad they took part and debriefed everyone.

Question 5

(O) Weakness (V)

Answer 5

Lack internal validity.
Learner didn’t believe shocks real.
Explains high level of obedience so tested demand characteristics making results invalid.
However… in debrief 70% of participants believed they were real shocks.
Furthermore… Sheridan and King conducted similar experiment involving real electric shocks being given to puppy and 51% obeyed.

Question 6

Milgram’s Variations

Answer 6

Proximity, Location, and Uniform

Question 7

Proximity

Answer 7

Teacher and learner in the same room - obedience dropped to 40%.
Teacher had to force learners hand onto electroshock plate and obedience dropped to 30%.
Experimenter left room and gave instructions over the phone and dropped to 21% and pretend given them.
Decreased proximity from learner does not allow them to psychologically distance themselves. More proximity to experimenter means their authority is weakened.

Question 8

Location

Answer 8

Conducted it in a rundown office block rather than Yale which decreased obedience to 47.5%.
Uni gave legitimacy to authority so more obedient as believed experimenter shared this.

Question 9

Uniform

Answer 9

Had professional looking experimenter leave after giving instructions and replaced by ordinary person and obedience dropped to 20%.
Uniform encourages obedience as widely accepted as symbol of authority.

Question 10

(V) Strength (U)

Answer 10

Uniform has research support.
Bickman used three confederates dressed in different outfits (suit, milkman, and security guard) and asked them to pick up litter and were 2 times more likely to obey security guard than suit.
Likely to obey someone wearing uniform as it gives them legitimate authority.
Furthermore… field experiment means it increases ecological validity so generalisable.

Question 11

(V) Weakness

Answer 11

Suspected experimenters were fake.
Orne and Holland criticise original study because they feel extremeness may be questioned and assume it is fake.
False representation of obedience to authority so decreases validity.
Furthermore.. Milgram even recognised experimenter leaving and being replaced was very unlikely.

Question 12

(V) Strength (P)

Answer 12

Findings found in other cultures.
Meeus and Raaijmakers found 90% obeyed when proximity increased to person ordering the confederates decreased. (Holland)
Generalised to other cultures and increases validity.
However… Smith and Ben identified little replications in countries like India between 1968-1985 suggesting findings may only be applied to other individualistic cultures.