Milgrams Situational Variables Flashcards
Proximity
Teacher and learner in same room- 65% to 40%.
-touch proximity- teacher forced learners hand onto electroshock plate if he refused to place it there himself after giving wrong answer. Obedience dropped further to 30%.
-experimenter left room and gave instructions by phone- 20.5%
Explanation for proximity
Decreased proximity allows people to psychologically distance themselves from the consequences of their actions. For example, when teacher and learner were physically separated, teacher was less aware of the harm they were causing to another person- more obedient.
Location
Milgram conducted a variation in a run down office block instead of university- fell to 47.5%
Explanation for location
University environment gave study legitimacy and authority. Like obedience was expected.
Uniform
Experimenter in grey lab coat called away and replaced by member of public in everyday clothes. Obedience rate dropped to 20%.
Explanation for uniform
Uniform encourages obedience because they are widely recognised symbols of authority. We expect that someone in a uniform is entitled to expect obedience because their authority is legitimate.
Strength- research
In a field experiment in New York. Bickman(1974) had three confederates dress in different outfits- jacket and tie, milkman and security guard. Confederates individually stood in the street and asked passers by to perform tasks like picking up litter. People were twice as likely to obey security guard than suit and tie.
Strength- Cross cultural replications
Findings have been replicated in other cultures. Meeus and Raaijmakers(1986) used a more realistic procedure to study obedience in Dutch participants. Participants ordered to say stressful things in an interview to someone (confederate) desperate for a job. 90% obeyed. When person giving orders were not there, obedience decreased dramatically. Shows milgrams findings are valid across all cultures and genders.
-Counterpoint- Smith and bond (1998) identified just two replications between 1968 and 1985 that took place in India and Jordan- culturally different from US.
Limitation- low internal validity
Participants may have been aware procedure was fake. Orne and Holland (1968) made this criticism of Milgrams baseline study. Even more likely in variations as because of extra manipulations of variables. E.g. where experimenter is replaced by member of public- seems fake. Maybe participants ‘play acted’.
