obedience

Question 1

what is obedience

Answer 1

• a change in behaviour to follow a direct order from an authority figure who has the power to punish when obedience is not shown
• form of SI

Question 2

what was Milgram (1963) aim?

Answer 2

• wanted to assess obedience levels
• see whether people would obey figure of authority when told to harm another person

Question 3

what was Milgram’s (1963) procedure?

Answer 3

40 male volunteers - paid $4.50
- each ptp introduced to conf upon arrival - drew lots on who would be ‘teacher’ (T) and ‘learner’ (L - called mr wallace) - lot fixed so ptp always teacher
- an ‘experimenter’ also involved who was a conf
- learner - strapped to chair + wired up with electrodes - had to remember pair of words each time made error ptp had to give electric shock via switches on ‘shock machine’
- from slight to intense to danger-severe - when teacher 300 volts L pounded on wall + no response to next q
- 315 again pounded but silent rest procedure

Question 4

what happened when ptp refused to administer shocks

Answer 4

when ptp refused to administer shock - experimenter gave series of - prods
- prod 1 - ‘pls continue’/’please go on’
- prod 2 - ‘the exp requires that you will continue’
- prod 3 - ‘it is absolutely essential that you continue’
- prod 4 - ‘you have no other choice, you must go on’

Question 5

what were the baseline findings of Milgram (1963)?

Answer 5

• all ptps went up to 300v and 12.5% stopped here
• 65% went up to 450v - fully obedient
• he collected qdata including observations: ptps showed signs of extreme tension - sweating, stuttering , biting lips + three had seizures

Question 6

what did milgram do after the study?

Answer 6

all ptps in baselin - debriefed
assured beh = normal
sent follow-up questionnaire - 84% glad to have ptp

Question 7

what does germany have to do with Milgram (1963)?

Answer 7

• he wanted to know why such high prop of germany obeyed hitler’s inhumane requests
• thought possible explanation - germans diff from people from other countries - perhaps more obedient
• to determine this needed a procedure to assess how obedient people are

Question 8

what were the conclusions of Milgram (1963)?

Answer 8

• concluded german people are not ‘different’
• american ptps willing to obey even when might harm another

Question 9

evaluate milgram 1963

Question 10

how is replication a strength of milgram

Answer 10

• due to the controlled laboratory nature of exp - every ptp completed exact same procedure
  so can be replicated
• French documentary in 2012 paid participants to administer fake electric shocks to actors
  and 80% delivered 460v to ‘unconscious’ man
• behaviour similar to that of Milgram’s (nervous laughter, nail biting etc)
• results were not just due to special circumstances but could be repeated
• participants obeyed authority figure regardless of the consequence on the individual
  increasing reliability

Question 11

how is replication a strength of milgram

Answer 11

• due to the controlled laboratory nature of exp - every ptp completed exact same procedure
  so can be replicated
• French documentary in 2012 paid participants to administer fake electric shocks to actors
  and 80% delivered 460v to ‘unconscious’ man
• behaviour similar to that of Milgram’s (nervous laughter, nail biting etc)
• results were not just due to special circumstances but could be repeated
• participants obeyed authority figure regardless of the consequence on the individual
  increasing reliability

Question 12

how is dealing with ethics a strength of milgram?

Answer 12

• ptp cared for after - carried out role as a psych - same mental state
• after the exp stopped- either when the experimenter used all verbal prods/max voltage reached
• all ptps thoroughly de-briefed + de-hoaxed - 84% reported that they felt glad to have participated
• Milgram also kept in touch years after - make sure study left no lasting mental or physical damage

Question 13

how is low internal validity a weakness of milgram?

Answer 13

• ptps behaved the way they did because guessed the shocks were not real
• so milgram didnt test what he intended to
• Perry listened to tapes of ptps + reported many expressed doubts about shocks
• does not reflect authority in real world eg. police , teachers
  everyday obedience is subtle compared to shocks
• cannot generalise to everyday
• lacks ecological validity

Question 14

how is sample a weakness of milgram?

Answer 14

• Androcentric study-data cannot be generalised to females
• sample included all men lacking pop validity

Question 15

what 3 situational variations did Milgram carry out after the baseline study

Answer 15

proximity
location
uniform

Question 16

what was Milgrams proximity variation like? what were the findings? explanation?

Answer 16

• teacher could hear learner but not see him in baseline
• in proximity variation - teacher + learner in same room - obedience rate dropped to 40%
• in touch proximity - dropped 30%
• remote instruction - reduced 20.5%
• decreased proximity allows people to psychologically distance themselves from consequences of actions - in baseline when seperated ptp less aware of harm so more obedient

Question 17

what was Milgrams location variation like? what were the findings? explanation?

Answer 17

• conducted in run-down office block - obedience fell to 47.5%
• prestigious uni environment gave study legitimacy + authority - ptps more obedient in location bc perceived experimenter shared this legitimacy + obedience expected

Question 18

what was Milgrams uniform variation like? what were the findings? explanation?

Answer 18

• in baseline experimenter wore grey lab coat as symbol of his authority
• in one variation experi called away at start + replaced by ordinary civilian (conf) in everyday clothes
• obedience dropped to 20%
• uniforms encourage obedience bc widely recognised as symbols of authority
• accept someone in a uniform entitled to expect obedience bc authority legitimate
• someone without - less right to expect obedience

Question 19

evaluate milgrams situational variations

Question 20

how is offering excuses a limitation of milgram?

Answer 20

• there is discomfort surrounding his finding’s supporting a situational explanation of obedience
• perspective criticised by Mandel (1998) - argues offers excuse/alibi for evil behaviour - offensive to survivors of holocaust to suggest nazis simply obeying orders
• milgram’s explanation also ignores role of dispositional factors - implying nazis victims of situational factors beyond their control

Question 21

how is support of the power of uniforms a strength of milgram’s research into situational variables?

Answer 21

• bickman (1974)
• tested ecological validity of Milgram’s work by conducting in more realistic setting - 3 researchers gave direct requests to random pedestrians
• in milkman uniform, guard uniform or suit+tie
• found ptps most likely to obey researcher dressed as guard 80% than milkman or civilian 40%
• supports milgram’s findings for uniforms - obedience influenced by amount of authority person perceived to have

Question 22

how is cross-cultural replication a strength of milgram’s research into situational variables?

Answer 22

• replicated in other cultures. The findings of cross-cultural research have been generally supportive of Milgram
• Miranda et al - obedience rate 90%+ amongst Spanish students -suggests
  that Milgram’s concs about obedience not limited to American males - valid across cultures + apply to females too

Question 23

how is DC a limitation to milgram’s research into situational variables?

Answer 23

• ptps may have been aware procedure faked
• Orne and Holland - criticised milgram og study + point out even more likely in variations bc of extra manipulation
• ex, when experi replaced by a ‘member of public’ - even milgram himself said situation so contrived ptps may well have worked out truth
• therefore in all studies unclear whether findings due to obedience or ptps saw through deception + responded to demand characteristics