milgrams Flashcards
What was the war trial which sparked his interest for the experiment
Adolf Eichmann’s
In what year did he begin his experiments
1961/63
What prestigious university did the experiment take place in
Yale
How did he recruit his participants and what kind of sample is this called
Newspaper article
Volunteer sampling
How many participants in his original study
40
What one of two roles where the participants accelerated and how where these decided
Student or teacher
“random” draw
which was actually a rigged draw
Who was Mr Wallace
Learner
Who was Jack Williams
Experimenter
Bullet point the stages of the procedure
1) Advertise for volunteers in news paper $4.00 travel fee
2) Random draw for who gets student or teacher role
3) The teacher (participant) has a sample electric shock of 45 volts
4) Teacher is given instructions of what to say to the learner
5) Teacher asks learner (confederate) a series of questions administering volts of 15 volt increments when incorrect
What percentage of participants went up to 300 volts
100%
What percentage of participants went up to 450 volts
65%
What voltage did the shocks start at and increased in increments of
15 volts
Give an example of a verbal prod used by the experimenter (Jack Williams)
“The experiment requires you to continue”
“You have no other choice but to continue”
What physical signs of discomfort did the participants show
nervous giggling
head in hands
sweating
trembling
Give two reasons why participants thought the experiment was real
Man in lab coat (insinuates medical expertise)
In a prestigious University
Describe two ways that the participants where deceived
1) Were not administering harmful electric shocks
2) They believed the learner to be another participant when in fact they were a confederate
What is meant by external (ecological) validity and why does milligrams study lack it
The experiment is not realistic to the real world as it took place in a lab and people would not be asked to give electric shocks in real life in order to test obedience
What debriefing did Milgram give to the participants
- a thorough debrief was given
- Milgram checked up on them a year later as many where deemed damaged afterwards
- Psychological therapy was offered
- They met Mr Wallis (learner) after the experiment was over
Why was a thorough debrief so important
Because the participants where deceived
They did not give informed consent
Some where emotionally unfit after the experiment
How many participants were glad that they participated
83.7%
give a reason for and against deceit for milligrams experiment
for: study required that he deceived participants in order to get the results needed, thorough debrief
against: deceived p’s in many ways e.g they believed they where administering harmful shocks to innocent victims
give reason for and against milligram’s experiment for informed consent
for: got consent for another experiment (learning) and got presumptive consent
volunteer sample gives consent
against: didn’t get informed consent giving them no information about the real study
give reason for and against milligram’s experiment for competence
for: milgram was considered competent before according to other qualified researchers ensuring protection of participants
checked on them a year later
no one believed p’s would obey (1/1000 said they would)
against: p’s scared and showed physical signs of discomfort
give reason for and against for right to withdraw in milligrams study
for: had right to withdraw as 65% did
where told before hand they could
against: verbal prods made it difficult “the experiment requires that you continue”
where payed
reason for milligram’s experiment when debriefing
for: thorough debrief after and checked up on a year laster by psychiatrist (no harm)
two features of milligrams study explaining why p’s obeyed
1) held at yale uni, prestigious so p’s thought researcher experts and trustworthy
2) p’s asked who’s responsible if learner harmed, showed visible relief when experimenter took responsibility
reasons milligrams study was ethical
1) all p’s debriefed and aware learner safe (met mr Wallace)
2) p’s examined by psychiatrist a year after and found no harm
3) survey shows 83.7% glad they took part
4) no ethical problems as p’s not forced
5) volunteer sample=consent
ethical issues with study
DECIEVED: believed learning and memory not obedience
thought Mr Wallace a naive p and getting shocks
RIGHT TO WITHDRAW: abused as told to continue
told at start but props made difficult to actively withdraw
INFORMED CONSENT: gave consent for a different experiment
not fully aware of what involved
evaluate methodology of experiment
- easy to replicate as in controlled setting
- standardised instructions makes it easy to replicate >reliable
- lacks ecological validity
- prone to demand characteristics as guess nature of experiment although visible signs of discomfort
- ethnocentric and androcentric
How can findings from the study be applied to real life
applied to US military changing way they train recruits
ww11 soldiers obeyed authority of hitler killing innocent jews
children obey parents as have more knowledge/power
aim of milligrams study
find out how far someone would go to obey authoritative figure
see if ordinary person follow orders even when breaking own moral code
to test if germans were different when carried out orders to persecute jews in ww11
what is obedience
a form of social influence on attitudes, beliefs and behaviour of individual
change in behaviour due to social pressure
people of different social status (authoritative and not)
is to obey requests and demands of others
give 4 reasons for dissent and give evidence from milligrams study
1) when there is confusion in the orders (2 experimenters at 110v one says to stop other to continue 100% stop)
2) when directly involved in punishment (hold hand down on shock, 30% obey)
3) when one giving orders is remote (over the phone, 22.5% obey or not at all)
4) not in setting that supports authority (rundown office block, 47.5%)
what is dissent
resistance to obedience
give four situational factors affecting obedience
status of authority
proximity
personal responsibly
momentum of compliance
give four individual differences factors affecting obedience
culture
gender
personality: locus of control
personality: authoritarian
