Milgrams Research A01&3

Question 1

Limitation

Answer 1

P-milgrams study is that it lacked internal validity
E-psychologists suggest participants guessed the electric shocks were fake. So milgram was not testing obedience
E-however, Sheridan and kings participants have real shocks to a puppy; 54% of males and 100% of females delivered what they thought was a fatal shock
L-so the obedience in mil grams study might be genuine, 70% of mil grams participants believed the shocks were genuine

Question 2

Strength

Answer 2

P-good external validity
E-psychologists found that levels of obedience in nurses on a hospital ward to unjustified demands by doctors were very high
E-milgram argued that the lab-based relationship between experimenter and participant reflected wider real-life authority relationships
L-therefore the processes of obedience in mil grams study can be generalised

Question 3

Limitation

Answer 3

P-ethical issues
E-Baumrind criticised Milgrams deceptions. Participants believed the allocation of roles was randomly assigned but it was fixed
E-Baumrind thought deception is a betrayal of trust that damages the reputation of psychologists and their research
L-deception of participants may also make them less likely to volunteer for future research

Question 4

Strength

Answer 4

P-replications have supported milgrams research findings
E-french documentary contestants in a reality TV game show we’re paid to give fake electric shocks to others when ordered by the presenter
E-80% gave the maximum 450V to an apparent unconscious man, their behaviour was like that of Milgrams participants
L-supports Milgrams original conclusions about obedience to authority and shows that his findings were not just a one-off