Milgram's Study of Obedience Flashcards
Obedience is…
… obeying direct orders from someone in authority.
Conforming is…
… obeying orders unwillingly.
Compliance is…
… willingly obeying an order but not necessarily agreeing with it.
Internalising is…
… obeying whilst agreeing to do so.
What was the aim of Milgram’s study?
To see if the Nazis were ‘different’ from other people, and to see whether or not ‘ordinary people’ would do likewise.
Participants thought that the study was about…
… the effect of punishment on learning.
What were the participants told about the shocks?
That they were painful but wouldn’t permanently damage tissue.
When did the learner begin reacting to the shocks?
At 300 volts.
How many participants were in the basic study?
40
How many participants gave shocks until the end?
26
All participants obeyed up to?
300 volts
How did participants react during the experiment?
- nervousness & nervous laughter
- sweating
- trembling
- digging nails into flesh
What were the 2 main conclusions of the study?
- social influence is strong
- people obey orders even if it causes them distress
How did setting affect the results of Milgram’s basic study?
- Yale University is a prestigious institute
- wouldn’t allow anything unethical
How did the aim of the study affect the results of Milgram’s basic study?
It had a worthy cause.
How did the participants, as volunteers, affect the results of Milgram’s basic study?
Because they volunteered, they had made a commitment.
How did the participants being paid affect the results of Milgram’s basic study?
They felt an obligation due to being paid.
How was the procedure of Milgram’s study well-controlled?
- set verbal prompts in a set order
- victim’s responses carefully prepared
- experiments of participants the same, so no bias
How is lack of bias a strength?
Lack of bias meant that the conclusions were firm, so cause & effect conclusions could be drawn.
How did a well-controlled procedure strengthen the study?
Study was replicable so it could be tested for reliability.
How was Milgram’s study unethical?
It caused distress & discomfort for participants.
Ethical issues made Milgram’s study…
… hard to replicate.
Verbal prompts pressurised the participants not to leave, which is against…
… the ethical principle of respect.
What gave the study a lack of ecological validity?
It was at a university, so the setting wasn’t realistic/ natural.
What was the aim of the variations?
To investigate what may have affected the participants in the basic study.
Experiment 10 (variation)?
Study took place in an office block.
What was the aim of experiment 10 (variation in setting)?
To see if obedience was affected by the setting (University of Yale).
Milgram kept everything else in his variations the same, to…
… make comparisons and conclusions.
Experiment 7 (variation)?
Experimenter was in touch by phone.
What was the aim of experiment 7?
To see if obedience was affected by the experimenter being present in the room.
In which experiment was obedience the greatest?
In the basic study.
Which variation had the least effect on obedience?
Setting
What had the most effect on obedience?
Commands being given by the experimenter.
What were the main features of experiment 7?
- telephonic instructions
- closeness of authority
- experimenter absent
What was the result of experiment 7?
Obedience dropped sharply.
Only 9 participants obeyed.
When the authority figure isn’t face-to-face, dissent is?
Easier
Why is having the same procedure a strength?
It helps with making comparisons, and cause-effect conclusions.
The hypothesis that the physical presence of an authority figure effects obedience is…
… strengthened.
What were the main features of experiment 10?
- rundown office block
- institutional context
Aims of experiment 10?
Would the power of the institution affect results?
Would obedience drop if the setting wasn’t so prestigious?
People regard Yale with awe & respect, so…
… they were confident that the study was done with integrity & competence, due to the setting & context.
Where was the study moved?
To Bridgeport, an industrial city near Yale.
Evidence that participants in experiment 10 had more doubts?
- one made notes
- one questioned his own judgement & thought the study was ‘heartless’
Results of experiment 10?
- lower level of obedience
- 47.5% (compared to the original 65%)
(Milgram didn’t regard this drop as significant).
How did the use of an office block strengthen experiment 10?
It gave it validity, as the study took place in the real world.
It was more realistic than a prestigious institute.
How are the results of experiment 10 a weakness?
As obedience didn’t fall much, validity may be questioned.
Experiment 10 is still weak as it still took place in a laboratory, so it may still have been seen by the participants as…
… a scientific experiment, thus obedience would be higher.
Obedience is more likely if the setting is?
Scientific
Obedience is less likely if the setting is?
Natural
What was the variation of experiment 13?
An ordinary man gave orders, instead of an experimenter.
What were the questions behind experiment 13?
- would the presence of the authority figure have an effect on obedience?
- is a command obeyed ‘just like that’, or only if it’s from an authority figure?
What were the 2 different features of experiment 13?
- experimenter gave initial instructions
- an ordinary man gave the commands
In experiment 13, what happened when the experimenter left the room?
An accomplice already present suggests to the participant a way of doing the study.
In experiment 13, the participant sees the orders as coming from?
An ordinary man
In experiment 13, the basic situation was still?
Created by authority
How many participants, out of 20, showed dissent in experiment 13?
16
How many participants, out of 20, went to the maximum shock level?
4
What was the variation in experiment 13a?
When the participant refused the ordinary man’s orders, he said they could swap roles - the participant would record the shocks given, and the accomplice would give the shocks.
What were the reactions of the participants, in experiment 13a, as bystanders?
- majority protested
- some tried to disconnect the power from the generator
- some tried to physically restrain the accomplice
What reduced authority in experiment 13?
The fact that the participant thought the accomplice was another participant.
Experiment 13 is still weak, as there is still a lot of authority present, due to:
- scientific apparatus
- Yale
