Milgram’s research into obedience Flashcards
1
Q
what was Milgram’s aim
A
- He wanted to find out if ordinary American citizens would obey an unjust order from an authority figure and inflict pain on another person because they were instructed to.
2
Q
what was Milgram’s procedure
A
- 40 male participants.
- 20-50 years old.
- Volunteer sample.
- Recruited through ads and mailing.
- Told the study was about learning.
- Paid $4.50.
- sample consisted of 40 male participants from a range of occupations and backgrounds.
- The participants were all volunteers who had responded to an advert in a local paper, which offered $4.50 to take part in an experiment on ‘punishment and learning’.
3
Q
what was Milgram’s method
A
- The 40 participants were all invited to a laboratory at Yale University and upon arrival they met with the experimenter and another participant, Mr Wallace, who were both confederates.
- The experimenter explained that one person would be randomly assigned the role of teacher and the other, a learner. - However, the real participant was always assigned the role of teacher.
- The experimenter explained that the teacher, the real participant, would read the learner a series of word pairs and then test their recall.
- The learner, who was positioned in an adjacent room, would indicate his choice using a system of lights.
- The teacher was instructed to administer an electric shock every time the learner made a mistake and to increase the voltage after each mistake.
- The teacher watched the learner being strapped to the electric chair and was given a sample electric shock to convince them that the procedure was real.
- The learner wasn’t actually strapped to the chair and gave predetermined answers to the test.
- As the electric shocks increased the learner’s screams, which were recorded, became louder and more dramatic.
- At 180 volts the learner complained of a weak heart.
- At 300 volts he banged on the wall and demanded to leave
- at 315 volts he became silent, to give the illusions that was unconscious, or even dead.
- The experiment continued until the teacher refused to continue, or 450 volts was reached.
- If the teacher tried to stop the experiment, the experimenter would respond with a series of prods, for example: ‘The experiment requires that you continue.’ Following the experiment the participants were debriefed.
4
Q
what were Milgram’s findings
A
- all of the real participants went to at least 300 volts
- 65% continued until the full 450 volts.
5
Q
what was Milgram’s conclusion
A
under the right circumstances ordinary people will obey unjust orders.
6
Q
what are the +ve AO3 points for Milgram’s research
A
- good external validity
- Hofling
- Supporting replication
- kept information confidential
- debriefing
- right to withdraw - also -ve
7
Q
expand on the +ve AO3 point good external validity
A
- the study does reveal something important about the relationship between the authority figure and the participant.
- Milgram argued that the lab environment accurately reflects wider authority relationships in real life.
- Supported by Hofling
8
Q
expand on the +ve AO3 point Hofling
A
- set his experiment in a number of psychiatric hospitals in the USA.
- Participants were 22 staff nurses on night duty.
- They were telephoned by an unknown doctor (a confederate of Hofling), and told to give medication of 20mg to a patient.
- The maximum daily dosage clearly printed on the label was for 10mg.
- The doctor said he would sign the right papers when he arrived 10 minutes later.
Results: - 21/22 nurses obeyed and started to prepare the dosage before they were stopped and told that they had taken part in an experiment
- The nurses said that doctors often phoned through instructions and they became annoyed if the nurses questioned them.
- This particular doctor had also said that he would sign the papers and take the responsibility
- This experiment studies obedience in a real-life settings
9
Q
expand on the +ve AO3 point supporting replication
A
- Burger (2009) found levels of obedience almost identical to those found by Milgram almost 46 years earlier.
- Milgram’s findings still appear to apply as much today as they did back in early 1960s
- The ‘Game of Death’ included a replication of Milgram’s study and found behaviour almost identical to the ppts in Milgram’s study - as did Derren Brown!
10
Q
expand on the +ve AO3 point, debriefing
A
- Milgram debriefed and followed people up – even after a year – to make sure they were not hurt by the experience.
- Most volunteers said that they were glad that they had taken part.
- Milgram did thoroughly debrief his participants and 84% of them claimed to be ‘glad’ they had taken part.
- Milgram’s argument was that his participants suffered no lasting damage, debriefing was thorough and follow-up questionnaires showed that the majority of participants found the experience valuable.
11
Q
expand on the +ve AO3 point, right to withdraw
A
- Some participants may have found it difficult to exercise their right to withdraw because they were being ordered by the experimenter to continue giving electric shocks.
- On the other hand, the fact that some participants did disobey and withdraw indicates that all of them could have done the same.
- It is important to indicate very clearly to the participants before the procedure begins that they can leave at any time.
12
Q
what are the -ve AO3 points of Milgram’s research
A
Ethics:
- low internal validity
- lack of informed consent
- deception
- right to withdraw - also +ve
- failure to protect from harm
13
Q
expand on the -ve AO3 point, low internal validity
A
- The study has been criticised for not actually testing obedience.
- It has been suggested that the pps guessed that the shocks were not real and therefore their ‘real’ behaviour was not being measured. (demand characteristics)
14
Q
expand on the -ve AO3 point, lack of informed consent
A
- The participants could not have given their fully informed consent because they did not know what the procedure would involve.
- Several aspects of the procedure were either withheld from the participants or misrepresented to them (i.e, they were deceived – see below).
- It could be argued that consent does not have to be fully informed otherwise many psychological studies would be impossible because they rely on the participants being unaware of what is really happening.
- But this should only occur when other options are not possible, and when the consequences are not serious.
- This wasn’t the case in Milgram’s procedure because many participants were visibly stressed and anxious.
- However, Milgram did thoroughly debrief his participants and 84% of them claimed to be ‘glad’ they had taken part.
15
Q
expand on the -ve AO3 point, deception
A
- The participants were deceived because: the allocation of teacher and learner roles was fixed; the electric shocks were fake; the learner was a confederate and not a genuine participant.
- These deceptions were clearly necessary for the procedure to be realistic.
- But if the consequences to the participants are too severe then conducting the study is unjustified.
- Milgram’s argument was that his participants suffered no lasting damage, debriefing was thorough and follow-up questionnaires showed that the majority of participants found the experience valuable.
