Obedience

Question 1

What is obedience?

Answer 1

Is the result of Social Influence where somebody acts in response to a direct order from an authority figure(s)
• Cardwell (2000)
- It is believed that without such an order the person would NOT have behaved in this way
- It may be destructive – as when people comply with orders from malevolent authority

Question 2

Who conducted the KEY STUDY into obedience, and when?

Answer 2

Milgram, 1963

Question 3

Milgram’s 1963 obedience study - Stanford Prison

Answer 3

Aim – To find out whether ordinary Americans would obey an unjust order from a person in authority to inflict pain on another person
Milgram wanted to discover what factors in a situation lead people to obey

Procedure

1. 40 male volunteers, paid $4.00 per hour, were deceived into thinking they were giving electric shocks
2. Participants were told it was concerning punishment in learning. The genuine participants were always the teacher, and had to administer an electric shock to the learner (confederate) every time they made a mistake. They watched the learner being strapped to a chair but couldn’t see them during the experiment
3. To begin with the accomplice answered correctly then began to make mistakes. Shocks started at 15v and rose at 15v increments to 450volts
4. If the pps hesitated they were prompted by the teacher:
   a. ‘please continue…’
   b. ‘the experiment equires you to continue…’
   c. it is absolutely essential that you continue…’
   d. You have no other choice, you must go on…’
5. No shocks were actually administered
6. The experiment continued either until the teacher effused to continue or until 450volts was administered and given 4 times
7. The pps were debriefed and taken to meet their learners after the experiment was over

Findings
• All pps went to at least 300V
• 65% believed they had administered the full 450V
• Most pps found the procedure very stressful and displayed severe signs of anxiety. Although they dissented verbally they continued to obey the researched who prompted them to continue giving the shocks

Conclusions
• Under certain circumstances, most people will obey orders that go against their conscience
• When people occupy a subordinate position in a dominance hierarchy, they become liable to lose feelings of empathy, compassion and morality and are inclined towards blind obedience
• Atrocities such as WWI genocide may be largely explained in terms of pressures to obey a powerful authority

Question 4

What range did the electric shocks go from in Milgram’s Obedience study?

Answer 4

15V - 450V

Question 5

Evaluate Milgram’s Obedience Study

Answer 5

• The study has received many criticisms, most relating to the potential harm that might have been done to participants
• Did participants really believe they were giving electric shocks? Orne and Holland (1968) claimed the study lacked EXPERIMENTAL (INTERNAL) VALIDITY. They also suggested that Milgram’s laboratory bore little resemblance to real life situations where obedience is required so it lacked ECOLOGICAL VALIDITY.

Question 6

What was the original obedience rate from Milgram’s obedience study?

Answer 6

65%

Question 7

Variation:

Venue moved to seedy office

What happened to obedience rate?

Answer 7

fell when pps exposed to less prestigious surroundings

Obedience rate = 47.5%

Question 8

Variation:

Teacher had to force learner’s hand onto plate to receive shock

What happened to obedience rate?

Answer 8

Fell further when pps were required to us physical force personally to administer shocks

Obedience rate = 30%

Question 9

Variation:

Teacher support from 2 other confederate teachers who refused to obey

What happened to obedience rate?

Answer 9

Fell when pps conformed to modelled disobedience by confederates

Obedience rate = 10%

Question 10

Variation:

Teacher paired with an assistant (confederate) who threw the switches

What happened to obedience rate?

Answer 10

levels soared when someone else was administering the shocks

Obedience Rate = 92.5%

Question 11

What is the A grade evaluation point of Milgram’s study?

Answer 11

Milgram asked psychiatrists to predict how many would go to 450 Volts – they said less than 1% and that these 1% would be psychopaths
- Therefore, justifying Milgram’s underestimation of the effects of his experiment

Question 12

You can Evaluate Milgram’s study using three factors, what are they?

Answer 12

Ethics
Ecological Validity
Experiment (Internal) Validity

Question 13

Evaluate Milgram’s study using it’s ecological validity

Answer 13

• Degree of generalizability beyond context of investigation

> Milgram’s studies = internationally repeated – higher obedience levels in Germany and lower levels in Australia (Kilham and Mann 1974)

> Plenty of Research support

However, Orne and Holland challenged the generalizability of Milgram’s findings as it bore little resemblance to real life

Hofling et al (1966) = supported ecological validity of Milgram’s study

Then Rank and Jacobson’s later study questioned ecological validity of the Hofling study!

Question 14

What is Ecological Validity?

Answer 14

The  Degree of generalizability beyond context of investigation

Question 15

What is Experimental (internal) validity?

Answer 15

The measure of experimental procedures work and if its effects are genuine

Question 16

Evaluate Milgrams study using it’s Experimental (internal) validity

Answer 16

-measure of experimental procedures work and if its effects are genuine

> Orne and Holland claimed pps pretended to be distressed to please researcher and didn’t believe they gave electric shocks

>Milgram used evidence from video footage and post-experimental interviews to support his belief that pps were under real, extreme stress and that they believed they were administering shocks

>Orne and Holland could not explain why some pps refused to continue giving shocks or why altering location reduced obedience

Question 17

What Ethical issues to Milgram get challenged with?

Answer 17

• Deception
  Purposefully misleading
  participants
• Informed consent
  A requirement that participants should have sufficient information
• Protection of participants
  Participants should be protected from undue risk during experiment, including humiliation
• Right to withdraw
  Should be made clear from outset they have a right to withdraw at any time, without reason
• Debriefing
  Discussion of experiment – informing participants of the nature and outcome of the study

Question 18

Why was this Ethical Issue for and against Milgram?

Deception

Answer 18

For Milgram
Eliminated demand characteristics and social desirability

Against Milgram
It is deceptive to lie to pps and lead them to believe they are causing real harm

Question 19

Why was this Ethical Issue for and against Milgram?

Informed consent

Answer 19

For Milgram
Eliminating demand characteristics by not keeping them fully informed

Against Milgram
Milgram technically removed their right to informed consent because they did not know the purpose of the experiment

Question 20

Why was this Ethical Issue for and against Milgram?

Protection of participants

Answer 20

For Milgram
Milgram did not know before the experiment that he would cause that much distress

Against Milgram
>Emotional Strain
>Short term psychological harm: stress from carrying out orders
>Long term psychological harm: Learning they were willing to kill someone - humiliation

Question 21

Why was this Ethical Issue for and against Milgram?

Right to withdraw

Answer 21

For Milgram
Milgram said he made it clear that they had the right to withdraw which was evident as some pps left.
>Milgram argued the prompts were vital as the order to continue was vital to the study
Against Milgram
It was not clear in Milgram’s study to what extent the pps had the right to withdraw
>Arguable that the prods made it ambiguous

Question 22

Why was this Ethical Issue for and against Milgram?

Debriefing

Answer 22

For Milgram
Debriefing was used to fully inform pps what happened & why
>Milgram claimed it was instrumental to helping reassure and protect pps
>Disobedient pps: reminded that their behaviour = socially desirable

Against Milgram
Too little too late?

Question 23

Which two researchers conducted alternative research into obedience?

Answer 23

Bickman (1974) - the power of uniform

Hofling et al (1966) - Nurses study

Question 24

Alternative research into obedience:

Bickman’s 1974 study - the power of uniform

Answer 24

Bickman (1974) the Power of Uniform

Procedure

• Three male experimenters dressed as either: a civilian, a milkman or a policeman.
• They made requests to passers-by to pick up a bag or provide money for a parking meter

Findings
People were most likely to obey the policemen and least likely to obey the civilian

Conclusion
Uniform does have an effect on people’s willingness to obey

Evaluation 
Strength of the study = natural setting 
      -	Weakness of the study = pps were random, so the individual differences/type of pps (e.g. their mood on the day)
High ECOLOGICAL VALIDITY
High REPEATABILITY

Question 25

Alternative research into obedience:

Hofling et al (1966) Burses study

Answer 25

Procedure
A nurse, alone on a late shift, received a phone call from an unknown doctor and asked to administer 20mg of an unknown drug. If she obeyed, she’d be giving twice the maximum dose and taking instruction from an unknown person.

Findings
21/22 started to give the medication (which was actually harmless but they were stopped by another nurse.

Conclusions
Nurses argued it was because they were used to obeying orders, so the pressures to obey were higher than they’d imagined

Evaluation 
Supports ecological validity of Milgram’s study because high levels of validity found in real life
	- high ecological validity
	- field experiment
	- no informed consent (ethics)
	- Lack of respect for nurses?