milgram variations

Question 1

Percentage of people who obeyed in ordinary people conditions

Answer 1

20%

Question 2

Percentage of people who obeyed in rundown office building

Answer 2

47.5%

Question 3

Percentage of people who obeyed in absent experimenter conditions

Answer 3

22.5%

Question 4

name the three variations of milgrams study

Answer 4

institutional context
proximity
power relations

Question 5

describe the institutional context experiment

Answer 5

recruited via mail and still offered $4.00
came to a run down office block and told it was run by an outside firm
same procedure as original

Question 6

describe the proximity experiment

Answer 6

after giving the original instructions the experimenter left the room and continued the rest of the instructions over the phone (telling him to increase the voltage)
all other points remained the same

Question 7

describe the power relations experiment

Answer 7

role of experimenter 2 played by an ordinary man who was a confederate
participant thought that he was a normal participant too
confed experimenter told to note timings down
when the real experimenter left the room the confederate experimenter told the participant to raise the voltage
real experimenter gave all instructions other than raising the voltage

Question 8

results of the institutional context experiment

Answer 8

47.5% gave 450V

participants questioned the credentials of the ‘firm’

Question 9

results of the proximity experiment

Answer 9

22.5% went to 450v

participants stayed at a low voltage and lied about it to the experimenter

Question 10

results of the power relations experiment

Answer 10

20% went to 450v

Question 11

conclusion of institutional context experiment

Answer 11

less reputable context
reduced the legitimacy of the study
results lower but not to disimilar to the original
not backed up

Question 12

conclusion of the proximity experiment

Answer 12

easier to not obey when not face to face
less pressure
physical presence is an important factor

Question 13

conclusion of the power relations experiment

Answer 13

experiment was strained

confederate had to go to consoderable lengths to get the participants to increase the voltage

Question 14

strengths of the institutional context

Answer 14

identical controls to the orignal which makes an easy comparison
office block added to validity as it is more true to real life than yale university - more naturalistic setting

Question 15

weaknesses of institutional context

Answer 15

still carried out in a lab which means it is still seen as a scientific study - lacks validity
controls such as verbal prods meant it was not a real life task and lowers validity as we can’t apply to real life obedience

Question 16

strengths of confederate experimenter

Answer 16

participant saw the draw of the confed being the experimenter which helped to reduce authority in the situation and increased the experimental validity
proceudre was the same so they can be compared easily
reliability

Question 17

weaknesses of confederate experimenter

Answer 17

as the participant didn’t obey the confed it could be said that they knew the experimenter was the member of authority and that they had to obey them and this is a validity issue
still lots of authority as it was in yale so the other participant may not have reduced power in the situation

Question 18

strengths of proximity experiment

Answer 18

carried out other variations where he tested presence of experimenter which also showed difference in obedience levels there is validity
used same procedure which increases reliability and makes it easy to compare

Question 19

weaknesses of proximity experiment

Answer 19

not a natural situation- participants had a relationship with the experimenter and so saw themselves as the helper question the validity
may not have believed the shocks were real - trusted the respect of yale and the scientific background and know they wouldn’t have shocked real people