Milgrams research into obedience and situational variables

Question 1

What was the aim of Milgram’s study?

Answer 1

To investigate how obedient participants would be in situation where they had to follow orders from an authority figure and harm another person.

Question 2

Outline Milgrams baseline procedure.

Answer 2

40 American men (aged 20-50) volunteered to take part in the study, supposedly on memory. When each volunteer arrived at the lab he was introduced to another participant (a confederate of Milgram). They drew lots to see who would be the teacher and who would be the learner. The draw was fixed so that the partipant was always the teacher and Mr Wallace was the learner. An experimenter was also involved (a confederate). The study aimed to assess obedience in a situation where the experimenter ordered the participant to give an increasingly strong shock to a learner in a different room. The shocks were fake but the teacher did not know this. The learner was strapped into a shock generator and the teacher and learner were placed either side of a screen so that they could hear but not see each other. The teachers asked questions to the learner and were told to administer electric shocks of increasing voltage (up to 450V) for every wrong answer. No actual shocks were administrated. The experimenter was in the room overseeing the operation and was dressed in a white lab coat. He reminded them of a need to continue.

Question 3

What were the results of Milgrams experiment?

Answer 3

All of the participants gave Mr Wallace atleast 300V. 65% gave the maximum 450V to an apparently dead Mr Wallace.

Question 4

What was the conclusion of Milgrams experiment?

Answer 4

Most participants were clearly distressed by the task. Some wept and begged in distress as they believed they had killed Mr Wallace. When interviewed they said that they felt like they could not stop when the experimenter ordered them to continue. The study clearly shows the power of authority over our behaviour. Even when the participants were clearly upset by what they had to do, they still saw no alternative.

Question 5

Give a strength of Milgrams research into obedience. (Research support)

Answer 5

Milgrams findings were replicated in a French documentary made about reality TV. The documentary focused on a game show and partipabts in the game believed they were contestants in a pilot episode for a show called the Game of Death. They were paid to give (fake) electric shocks (ordered by the presenter) to other participants (actors) in front of a studio audience. 80% of the participants delivered the maximum shock of 460 volts to an apparently unconscious man. Their behaviour was almost identical to that of Milgrams participants- nervous laughter, nail biting etc. This supports Milgrams original findings about obedience of authority and shows that the findings were not due to special circumstances.

Question 6

Give a strength of Milgrams research into obedience. (Lab setting)

Answer 6

Milgrams study was conducted in a controlled setting and the experimenter had great control over variables.

Question 7

Give a limitation of Milgrams research into obedience. (Low internal validity)

Answer 7

Milgrams procedure may not have been testing exactly what he intended to test. Milgram reported that 75% of his participants said they believed that the shocks were genuine. However researchers have argued that participants behaved as they did because they did not really believe in the set up so were play acting. Perrys reserch confirms this as she listened to the tapes of Milgrams participants and reported that only half of them believed the shocks were real. This suggests that the participants may have been responding to demand characteristics and trying to fulfil the aims of the study.

Question 8

Give a limitation of Milgrams research into obedience. (Ethical issues).

Answer 8

The participants in this study were deceived. For example, they thought that the allocation of roles was random but it was fixed. They also thought the shocks were real. As a result of this, the participants could have experienced serious psychological consequences.

Question 9

What are the three main situational variables involved in obedience?

Answer 9

Location -Proximity -Uniform

Question 10

What was the original obedience rate in Milgrams baseline study?

Answer 10

65%

Question 11

How did Milgram test location as a situational variable?

Answer 11

He changed the location to a run down office block.

Question 12

What happened when Milgram tested location as a situational variable?

Answer 12

Obedience level was 47.5%.

Question 13

Why did obedience decrease when Milgram tested location.

Answer 13

The prestigious university environment gave the study legitimacy and authority as oppose to the run down office block. Participants were more obedient as the environment shared this legitimacy.

Question 14

How did Milgram tets proximity?

Answer 14

The teacher and learner were now in the same room.

Question 15

What happened when Milgram tested proximity?

Answer 15

Obedience level was 40%.

Question 16

Why did the obedience level decrease when Milgram tested proximity.

Answer 16

Decreased proximity allows people to psychologically distance themselves from the consequences of their actions.

Question 17

How did Milgram test uniform?

Answer 17

The experimenter is replaced by a member of the public with no uniform.

Question 18

What happened when Milgram tested obedience?

Answer 18

Obedience level was 20%. Uniforms encourage obedience because they are widely recognised symbols of authority. Someone in uniform is entitled to expect obedience.

Question 19

Give a strength of Milgrams situational variables research. (Research support).

Answer 19

Studies have demonstrated the influence of situational values on obedience. In a field experiment in NYC, Bickman had three confederates dress in different outfits- jacket and tie, a milkman’s outfit and a security guards uniform. The confederates individually stood in the street and asked passers by to perform tasks such as picking up litter or handing over a coin for the parking meter. People were twice as likely to obey the assistant dressed as a security guard than the one in a jacket and tie. This supports the view that a situational variable, such as uniform, does have a powerful effect on obedience.

Question 20

Give a limitation of Milgrams situational variables research. (The danger of the situational perspective).

Answer 20

Milgrams research findings support a situational explanation of obedience but this perspective hs been criticised by researchers who argue it is an excuse or alibi for evil behaviour. In his view, it is offensive to survivors of the Holocaust to suggest that the Nazis were simply obeying orders. Milgrams explanation ignores the role of dispositional factors (e.g personality) which implies that the Nazis were victims of situational factors beyond their control.

Question 21

Give a limitation of Milgrams situational variables research. (Low internal validity).

Answer 21

Participants may have been aware that the procedure was faked. Orne and Holland made this criticism of Milgram’s baseline study. They point out that it is even more likely in his variations because of the extra manipulation of variables. A good example is the variation where the experimenter is replaced by a member of the public. Even Milgram recognised that the participants probably worked out the truth. Therefore in all of Milgtams studies it is unclear wether the findings are genuinely due to the operation of obedience or because the participants saw through the deception and just ‘play-acted’.