Milgram's Variations Flashcards
Milgrams Variations=
Telephone Instructions
A01
Aim- To test the EFFECT OF EXPERIMENTER influences
Procedure-Same as original but changed how instructions were given
-After giving initial instructions; experiment LEFT THE ROOM and gave his orders by TELEPHONE
Results- Obedience rates FELL to 9/40- 22.5%, compiling to 450VOLTS
-Some participants administered LOWER shockers than required, NOT INFORMING of their DEVIATION from the instructions given
Conclusion- Participants were able to RESIST the experimenter BETTER when they didn’t have to CONFRONT him FACE TO FACE
Milgrams Variations=
Telephone Instructions
A01- How does this show DISSENT
Demonstrates how the PHYSICAL PRESENCE of an authority figure was an IMPORTANT FORCE in influencing the participants OBEDIENCE + DEFIANCE
Seems to be no LEGITIMATE AUTHORITY when there is PROXIMITY between the authority figure and participant, as it could have been ANYONE on the phone. So participants may not feel OBLIGED to continue to 450 VOLTS
Extremely important to consider SITUATIONAL FACTORS when designing a study as they can seriously affect results
Milgrams Variations=
Telephone Instructions
A03- Internal Validity
Internal Validity- Strength
Milgram used the same carefully controlled procedure through his studies; with the only change occurring in this variation being that the instructions were delivered over the phone (no physical presence of the experimenter). Therefore, this allows us to establish a clear cause and effect conclusion on obedience as we can be sure any change in obedience is caused by this manipulation of the independent variable- the changing in how instructions were given.
Milgrams Variations=
Telephone Instructions
A03- Supporting Evidence
Supporting evidence- Strength
Milgram’s findings that the presence and proximity of the experiment impact obedience is supported by evidence from his other variations in which he varied the physical presence of the experimenter also. This strengthens his conclusion that the physical presence of a legitimate authority in this case the experimenter is important in obtaining obedience of others. This suggests his conclusions is accurate and credible as a wealth of data backs up his claims.
Milgrams Variations=
Telephone Instructions
A03- Ecological Validity
Weakness-Ecological Validity
We can question the external validity of Milgram’s results as he concludes that participants seem to have a relationship with the experimenter in wanting to help in the scientific experiment. They believed they were in the role of ‘helper’. This suggests the artificial environment which was clearly set up for scientific study affected their obedience, they were not in an autonomous state as ‘helper’ and therefore obeyed because they trusted the experimenter. This suggests the measure of obedience is inaccurate and makes it difficult to apply the results as this experiment as it is not representative of a natural, real life situation in which an individual would usually obey.
Milgrams Variations=
Telephone Instructions
A03- Demand Characteristics
Weakness-Demand Characteristics
The prestigious setting and the experimenter’s appearance as an expertise in their area suggests the participants may have trusted that the experimenter had regard for the victim and so potentially believed the shocks or the experiment itself was entirely real. Therefore, we can question the validity of this study as it suggests that the measure obedience in the participants is inaccurate, reducing the overall credibility of the theories generated
Milgram’s Variations=
Office Block
A01
Aim-To test the EFFECT of LOCATION/SETTING
Procedure- Same as original, but took place in an OFFICE BLOCK in BRIDGEFRONT
-Described as SPARSELY FURNISHED, but CLEAN and RESPECTABLE in appearance
-Told it was a PRIVATE FIRM conducting the study if asked
Results- Obedience rates FELL to 47.5% complying to 450VOLTS compared to 65%(not a significant difference)
-2 REFUSED to give shocks at 15VOLTS
Conclusion- As there was a relatively high level of obedience in office block, the idea of having a LEGITIMATE SETTING doesn’t seem to be backed by evidence
-Milgram wondered if it was the CATEGORY of place which lead to obedience eg people deposit money into PRESTIGIOUS looking banks and SEEDY ones
Milgram’s Variations=
Office Block
A03- Validity
Ecological Validity- Strength
Using an office block improved the ecological validity of the study as it took place in the real world to an extent and therefore a more natural setting. This means it is easier to apply Milgram’s results and conclusion around the effect legitimate settings to society as they’re more representative of how people would obey in real life situations. 2 participants questioned the legitimacy of the study and experimenters, suggesting that the naturalistic setting did improve the validity of the study.
Milgram’s Variations=
Office Block
A03– Internal Validity
Internal Validity- Strength
The same controls were kept, keeping the study in Bridgeport identical to the one at Yale, with the setting the only variable changed. This allows us to draw a cause and effect conclusion to show that obedience wasn’t impacted greatly by the prestigious setting, and so isn’t a large factor in obedience of individuals. This improves the validity of the study as we can be sure the changed variable is what did/didn’t impact the obedience in the participants.
Milgram’s Variations=
Office Block
A03-Mundane Realism
Mundane Realism- Weakness
Despite the more naturalistic setting, the controls, generator and controlled verbal prods all remained the same. This shows that the task remained far from real, and representative of what participants would face in terms of obedience in everyday life. Therefore, this reduces the validity of the study as it implies that this is not an accurate measure of obedience in everyday life. Furthermore, this makes it difficult to generalise to obedience in real life, limiting the usefulness of the study
Milgram’s Variations=
Office Block
A03- Credibility
Credibility-Weakness
We can questions the accuracy of Milgram’s conclusions as he used 19 participant in his office block variation compared to 26 in the Yale setting. Milgram claims this is not a large difference, however there is still less obedience with 47.5% compared to 65% obedience, implying the comparison between the Office Block setting and Yale is inaccurate. It suggests the conclusion he reaches lacks validity and therefore, his findings in this variation has reduced credibility.
Milgram’s Variations=
Ordinary Man
A01
Aim-To test the EFFECT of PERCEIVED POWER
Procedure- Same procedure as original study, however there was 3 participants, 2 confederates and the experimenter. 1 confederate LEARNER and 1 confederate RECORDING task time. Experimenter gives instructions to the point of administering the shocks but then gets ‘called away’. ACCOMPLICE (who they think is another participant) suggests a NEW WAY of doing the study- going up shock levels one at a time in response to victim making a mistake (usual procedure). If refused accomplice would continue giving shocks.
Results- Obedience rates FELL SIGNIFICANTLY to 16/20- 80% not continuing to the end. Almost all PROTESTED when accomplices pushed through with their way. Became BYSTANDERS- some tried to DISCONNECT power from generator or PHYSICALLY RESTRAIN accomplice. Defending ‘victim’
Milgram’s Variations=
Ordinary Man
A03- Reliability
Reliability- Strength
Throughout his studies Milgram has maintained the same standardised procedure to an extent; using the same controls, apparatus set up and deception. This standardisation means we can be sure that any change in obedience is due to the variation. Improving the accuracy of results. This means that the main study and the variation can be replicated to test for consistency in the results found. Improving the reliability of Milgram’s studies overall.
Milgram’s Variations=
Ordinary Man
A03- Validity
Validity- Strength
The validity is high in this variation as the participant saw the accomplice draw lots just as the victim did, ensuring that the participant saw the accomplice as another participant not an authority. This reduces the authority in the situation, improving the validity as it accurately measures the participants obedience to what they perceive to be an ordinary person.
Milgram’s Variations=
Ordinary Man
A03- Internal Validity
Internal Validity- Weakness
Milgram himself admitted that despite controls in place to prevent this, there was still a lot of authority in the situation, such as the scientific apparatus or obvious approval from Yale university in conducting the experiment. Therefore, the participants obedience may be due to what they perceived as authority and not obedience towards the ordinary man. Therefore reducing the credibility of this variation as obedience may not be measured accurately.
