Obedience Flashcards
(107 cards)
1
Q
What does social psychology investigate ?
A
Social psychology investigates aspects of human behaviour that involve individuals relationship to other people, groups and society; including cultural influences on behaviour.
2
Q
What are the 4 key assumptions of social psychology ?
A
1) The approach assumes that other people can effect our behaviour, thought processes and emotions.
2) It also suggests that the social situation can affect our behaviour, thought processes and emotions.
3) Being in groups in society also effects behaviour. We respond differently to people depending on the group they are in and we tend to favour people who are members of groups to which we belong.
4) The roles that we play in society also affect our behaviour.
3
Q
Define social influence ?
A
When an individuals behaviour, attitudes or emotions are affected by someone else.
4
Q
Define obedience ?
A
Obedience is a form of social influence. It means following direct orders from someone in authority.
5
Q
Define compliance ?
A
Compliance is part of obedience, it means going along with what someone says, while not necessarily agreeing with it.
6
Q
Define dissenting ?
A
Dissenting is where the orders are rejected, the person doesn’t do what they are told to .
7
Q
Define Internalising ?
A
Internalising means that you obey with agreement.
8
Q
Define conformity ?
A
Conformity means that you adopt the behaviour and attitudes of those around you.
9
Q
To what extent can obedience been deemed useful ?
A
Obedience can be deemed useful as it allows society to function smoothly for example to ensure people do not engage in criminal activity by abiding the law to keep society safe.
Alternatively obedience can have serious negative consequences, this can be seen in World War 2 where concentration camp guards followed instructions to murder innocent people.
10
Q
Who conducted a behavioural study of obedience in 1963 ?
A
Milgram conducted a Behavioural study on obedience in 1963.
11
Q
Why did Milgram conduct his studies ?
A
Milgram wanted to test the idea that Germans were different to other people, in that they were obedient in carrying out orders to slaughter millions of Jews and other minority groups in concentration camps in World War 2.
12
Q
What was the aim of Milgrams research ?
A
To see if volunteer participants would be similarly obedient to inhumane orders: how far would they go in giving electric shocks to someone who they believed to be just another participant.
13
Q
How did Milgram recruit his participants ?
A
Milgram used advertisement and direct mail to recruit a sample of 500 men.
14
Q
What was the sample of Milgrams study ?
A
From the 500 men recruited he chose 160 men, balanced across his 4 initial study variations; meaning 40 men took part in each study. They were a mix of ages, occupations and educational levels. Milgram paid them a small sum of $4 for their participation. Each participant was then invited to an individual meeting at interaction laboratory at Yale University.
15
Q
What were the participants told the study was investigating ?
A
On arrival, an experimenter told each participant that the experiment was aimed to see how punishment affected learning. With each study involving one teacher and one learner.
16
Q
How was it decided who would be be the teacher and learner in Milligram’s study.
A
The participants were introduced to another “participant” who was actually a confederate. Lots were drawn to see who would be the teacher and who would be the learner. The drawing of lots was rigged so the real participant was always the teacher and the confederate was the learner.
17
Q
How was the teacher convinced they electric shock was real ?
A
The learner and teacher were taken to the experimental room in Yale University. In order to convince the teacher that the shock machine was real he was given an example shock of 45 volts.
18
Q
Did the learner receive any electric shocks ?
A
During the experiment the learner didn’t actually receive any electric shocks.
19
Q
Describe the procedure of Milgrams study ?
A
The teacher was taken to another room where he could hear the learner but not see him. The teacher was asked to read a series of word pairs to the learner and then after he had read all the pair to the learner the teacher read the first word of the pair along with four terms. The learner had to indicate which of the four terms were correct. If the learner got the wrong response, the teacher give them an electric shock. Every time the learner made an error, the voltage was increased by 15 volts.
The shocks started at 15 volts and went up to 450 volts. The switches of the shock machine had labels like “slight shock” and “danger” so the teacher knew that the shocks would be painful. The final two switches were labeled “XXX”. the responses by the learner were pre set, the learner didn’t protest until 300 volts was reached; at this stage he pounded on the wall. After this he didn’t respond at all to the questions but remained silent. He pounded the wall again at 315 volts but remained silent.
The teacher was told to treat no response as a wrong response and to continue increasing the voltage to 450 volts. If the teacher asked the experimenter for advice, if the learner might suffer or if the teacher wanted to stop he responded with standardised prods.
After the procedure, all participants were interviewed using open questions and attitude scales. After this procedures were undertaken to ensure that the participants would leave the laboratory in a state of well being. As part of the debriefing process, a friendly reconciliation with the interviewer was arranged. Most participants thought the study was real rating the shocks as a 14 on a scale where 14 meant extremely painful.
20
Q
What were the 4 Standardised prods used by the experimenter ?
A
Prod 1: Please continue
Prod 2: The experiment requires you to continue
Prod 3: It is absolutely essential you continue
Prod 4: You have other choice, you must go on.
21
Q
If the teacher asked whether the learner might suffer from harm what prod was used by the experimenter?
A
If the teacher asked whether the learner might suffer from harm the experimenter said “ Although the shocks might be painful, there is no permanent tissue damage, so please go on”
22
Q
If the teacher said that the learner wanted to stop what prod was used by the experimenter ?
A
If the teacher said that the learner wanted to stop the experimenter said “ Whether the learner likes it or not, he must continue until he has learnt all the word pairs so please go on.
23
Q
In the pilot study Milgram conducted what was the predicted results of his experiment ?
A
In a pilot study, where Milgram described the experimental situation to a sample of psychiatrist, students and middle-class adults and asked them to predict how 100 hypothetical participants would behave. The participants predicted most Americans would stop before the 150 volts shock level, and no more than 4% of participants would continue to 450 volts.
24
Q
What was the quantitative results from Milgrams study ?
A
In Milgrams actual study, 100% of the participants obeyed to 300 volts. 14 participants stopped before 450 volts. 26 out 40 men (65%) who participated in the experiment continued to obey to the maximum of 450 volts.
25
What was the qualitative results from Milgrams study ?
During the experiment, many participants showed visible signs of distress: Milgram says that they were observed to protest, twitch nervously and laugh nervously. Milgram noted down comments from some of the participants that indicated their stress such as " I think he's trying to communicate, he's knocking" , "well its not fair to shock the guy" , "these are terrific volts I don't think this is very humane " and " oh I can't go in with this" however some participants remained calm throughout.
26
What were the conclusions of Milgrams study ?
Social influence is strong and people obey orders even when this causes them distress. Milgram was suprised by the level of obedience shown as the opinion of students and colleagues had been maximum 4% of people would continue to the end.
27
In Milgrams conclusions what features were believed to lead to obedience ?
1) Yale university is a prestigious insitution and unlikely to allow anything unethical to occur.
2) The study seemed to have a worthy cause- to learn about punishment and learning.
3) the victim was willing and had agreed to take part.
4) they participant had volunteered and had made a commitment.
5) The participant was paid and so felt an obligation.
6) The learner was there by chance; he could have been the teacher
7) This was a new situation for the participant, who had no idea of what was suitable behaviour.
8) It was thought that the shocks were painful but not dangerous
9) Up to 300 volts the learner plays the game and seems will and the use of a gradual increase of voltage means there isn't a clear place to stop.
28
How generalisable are the results of Milgram study?
The results could be seen as generalisable because of the use of a volunteer sample collecting a large range of men of ranging ages, jobs and educational levels.
Alternatively the generalisability could be seen as low as the participants were recruited using an advertisement so only people who saw the advert could make up the sample and were all from one area with America . Furthermore the use of a volunteer sample could lower the generalisability because those who volunteer for studies could have different characteristics to those who don't. Also the sample consists of only males so it doesn't apply to females and took place in 1963 so may not be the same as obedience levels today.
29
How reliable are the results of Milgrams study?
Milgrams results could seen as reliable because it was a laboratory study allowing for standardised procedures to be carried out for example the prods used by the experimenter and the learners pre-set response to the teacher. This makes the study easy to replicate increasing its reliability.
30
How applicable is Milgrams study ?
Milrams study was ground breaking because it showed that obedience levels of society was much higher than predicted as well as identifying potential factors that effect obedience levels which could be useful for authority figures like police officers to ensure laws are abided by. Additionally the study identified that events like the holocaust could still occur allowing for methods to be developed to prevent this.
31
How valid are the results of Milgrams study ?
The study could been seen to have high internal validity as researchers controlled all extraneous variables for example not revealing the true aim of the study controlled for demand characteristics and the example shock of 45 volts given to the teacher ensured they believed the electric shocks to be real. this means the study accurately measures what it intends to; obedience increasing face validity. Furthermore the collection of both qualitative and quantitative data provides rich and detailed data that can also be considered objective and statistically analysed increasing the scientific credibility of the study, thus increasing validity.
Nevertheless the use of a Laboratory experiment lowered the ecological validity as the environment was fake along with the task being unsual reducing mandane realism. However it can be argued their is no specific place obedience takes place and the event of massacre to a whole religion through concentration camps would have been deemed unusual yet it still took place. Furthermore participants showed they felt distressed giving the study high experimental realism as it shows they thought the situation was real.
32
Did Milgram adhere to ethical guidelines ?
Milgrams study didn't adhere to ethical guidelines because the participants were not protected from harm as they showed clear signs of distress as most twitched and laughed nervously. Participants were also deceived as they didn't know the true aim of the study, this also causes problems with informed consent because if they were unaware of the intentions of the study they could not provide informed consent. Additionally the prods used by the researcher such as "it is essential you continue" and "you have no choice, you must go on" make it difficult for participants to believe they have the right to withdraw.
33
Describe Milgrams Experiment 7, telephonic interactions variation study ?
In experiment 7, the telephonic Instructions Study, Milgram wondered if having the experiment physically present in the room effected the levels of obedience so he changed the proximity of the experimenter. After Initially giving the instructions the learner face to face, the experimenter left the room and gave further instructions over the phone. everything else in the variations procedure was kept the same as the original study. Milgram found that the number of participants giving maximum voltage dropped to 22.5%. He also observed that some participants chose to repeatedly administer lower voltage shocks rather than increasing the voltage and sometimes lied to the experimenter about doing this.
34
What are the strengths of Milgrams Experiment 7, telephonic interactions variation study ?
1) Only one variation in the procedure from the orginal study- all other variables remained the same- which makes it possible to compare the effects of manipulating the independent variable so we can see cause and effect links between obedience and proximity of experimenter.
2) Milgrams results in this variation are supported as, in another variation of this study, Milgram found that if the experimenter returned to the office after a period of giving telephonic instructions, the participants would become obedient again.
35
What is the weaknesses of Milgrams Experiment 7, telephonic interactions variation study ?
Participants may not believe the shocks are real, as they would expect scientists from a reputable university to protect participants and not leave them alone with a potentially danger machine. this means the validity of the study may be low.
36
Describe Migrams Experiment 10, the rundown office block variation study ?
In experiment 10, the rundown office block study, Milgram wondered if the setting of the original research - Yale university - might have influenced obedience. His evidence for this was during the interviewing part of the debrief of his original study many of the participants trusted the experimenter because of their association to Yale University a very prestigious institution. Therefore Milgram changed the setting to a run down office block, he also disassociated the study as a whole from Yale University. He did this by telling participants that the study was being conducted by a research body called Research Associates of Bridgeport, a private company conducting research in the commercial industry. The same procedure was followed during the experiment as in the original study. Milgram found a slight reduction in in obedience as 47.5% gave the maximum voltage. this suggested that the less reputable setting reduced the legitimacy of the study.
37
What are the strengths of Migrams Experiment 10, the rundown office block variation study ?
1) Only one variation in the procedure from the orginal study- all other variables remained the same- which makes it possible to compare the effects of manipulating the independent variable so we can see cause and effect links between obedience and location of the study.
2) Use of an office block instead of a university may have increased the mandane realism of the study as it an environment more closely associated to everyday life increasing the validity.
38
What is the weakness of Migrams Experiment 10, the rundown office block variation study ?
Despite the more naturalistic setting , the study is still low in mandate realism, due to the use of shock generator and the controlled verbal prods.
39
Describe Migrams Experiment 13, an ordinary man gives orders variation study ?
In Experiment 13, an ordinary man gives orders Milgram wondered if the authority and status of the experimenter influenced obedience. In the procedure for the experiment 13, three people arrived at the laboratory: one participant and two confederates. As usual, a rigged draw meant that the participant was chosen to be the teacher, the first confederate was given the role of the learner and the second confederate was given the role of recording the times from the experimenter's desk. The usual procedure was followed until the experimenter then received a rigged phone call and left the room. On leaving he told the teacher to carry on with the assigned task however, he didn't mention what level of shock to give. The second confederate then suggested that the teacher should increase the shock level event time the learner got an answer wrong. So, the instructions were being given by an ordinary man who lacked any scientific authority. Milgram found that the obedience rate of reaching the maximum voltage fell to 20%. Therefore Milgram concluded that the authority level of the experimenter does affect obedience.
40
What are the strengths of Migrams Experiment 13, an ordinary man gives orders variation study ?
1) Only one variation in the procedure from the orginal study- all other variables remained the same- which makes it possible to compare the effects of manipulating the independent variable so we can see cause and effect links between obedience and the status of experimenter.
2) The participants saw the confederate learner draw lots, just as they had done- this reinforces the idea that he is just an ordinary man and therefore increases the validity of the study.
41
What are the weaknesses of Migrams Experiment 13, an ordinary man gives orders variation study ?
1) a problem with this variation was that the withdrawal of the experimenter seemed staged and artificial. This might have undermined the credibility of the experiment.
2) Participants may have still felt that the overall authority lay with the prestigious Yale University.
42
What was the overall conclusions of the variation studies ?
The level of obedience was the highest in the basic experiment: all the variations led to lower level of obedience. The setting had the least effect; the status of the experimenter had the greatest effect.
43
What are the two theories for explaining obedience that we study ?
1) Agency theory
| 2) Social impact theory.
44
Who developed the Agency theory ?
Migram developed the agency theory as an explanation of obedient behaviour.
45
What are the two states or ways of acting agency theory suggest people have ?
1) Autonomous state
| 2) Agentic state
46
what is the Autonomous state ?
In the autonomous state the person believes they have power. They freely choose their own behaviour and take control of there own actions. They will be guided by their own moral code.
47
What is the agent state ?
In the Agentic state, the person allows someone else to direct their behaviour, instead of choosing it themselves. They assume that because someone else is directing them, that the other person is responsible for the consequences of their behaviour. They are simply acting as an agent for that person. This may lead them to act against their own moral code. The person gives up their free will in order to serve the needs of society.
48
How does Milgram explain the agentic state through evolution ?
Milgram suggests that the agent state can be explained through evolution. It can be a survival strategy: following leaders obediently rather than acting independently can increase the chances of survival in a threatening situation. If people act autonomously, their tendency in a threatening situation would be to run away- whereas following orders to stay and fight as a group (in the agent state) would increase the chances of the group as a whole surviving. In modern times, the agent state helps society function smoothly.
49
How does Milgram suggest acting agentically is learnt ?
Milgram suggest that acting agentically is learnt in childhood from parents and schools, when children are taught to put aside their own wishes so that order can be maintained. The legal system reinforces this at adulthood.
50
How does moral strain link to the agent state ?
Milgram suggest that people experience moral strain when they feel that their obedient behaviour is wrong, and goes against their one moral codes. Displacing their responsibility onto an authority figure and shifting into the agentic state reduces moral strain. However a person could reduce moral strain by dissenting: choosing not to obey.
51
What are the strengths of agency theory ?
1) Milgrams study provides evidence for this theory because it supports the concept of moral strain. The participants showed evidence of distress when they were given an order to harm an innocent person. It also provides evidence for the concept of displacing responsibility because in the debriefing some of the participants reported that their behaviour was the responsibility of the experimenter and they had not wanted to shock the learner. Additionally the theory is supported by other research for example Hofling demonstrated that nurses would follow doctors' orders with in a hospital when asked to give as patient twice the daily dose of a drug. The majority of nurses displaced their responsibility thus providing evidence for milligrams agency theory.
2) Agency theory explains real life events, such as the obedience to authority shown by US soldiers during the Vietnam war, When Lieutenant Calley instructed his divine to massacre old men, women and children, justifying this by saying they were just following orders.
3) Studies from different cultures support agency theory. For example Meeus and Raajmaker found that Dutch participants would harass a job applicant because they were told to do so as part of a research study.
4) Theory explains the different levels of obedience found in variations of milligrams original study. A participants were made to take more responsibility, obedience decreased and when they weren't under authoritative orders (ordinary man variation ) obedience decreased.
52
What are the weaknesses of agency theory ?
1) The theory does not explain individual difference as to why some people obey and some people do not. IT ignores factors such as personality type.
2) The theory lacks direct evidence. Agency is an internal mental process and therefore cannot be directly observed. Similarly, Milgrams theory about the evolutionary development of agency theory can't be directly tested. For this reason we could argue that it is low in validity.
3) Agency theory does not explain motivational issues being obedience. An alternative theory which may be more useful than agency theory id the theory proposed by French and Raven (1990). French and Raven identified five bases of power which are said to motivate and influence behaviour. These include legitimate power, reward power, referent power, expert power and coercive power. These factors seem to explain milligrams fading better than agency theory.
4) The theory can be criticised because it seems to remove personal responsibility from those who commit atrocities under pressure, thus offering excuses to people who follow authority even when they know it is moral wrong to do so.
5) The theory is more of a description than an explanation, it shows us that people tend to obey authoritative figures but doesn't provide evidence to show us exactly why they do so.
53
Who developed the social impact theory as an explanation of obedience ?
Bibb Latane (1981) suggested the social impact theory as an explanation of obedient behaviour.
54
How does Social impact theory try to expand obedient behaviour ?
Social impact theory looks at how likely we are to be influenced by others. The theory suggest that the presence of other causes behavioural, cognitive and emotional changes in person.
55
Who is referred to as the target in the social impact theory ?
Latane refers to the person being impacted on as the target.
56
Who is referred to as the source in the social impact theory ?
The person doing the influencing is referred to as the source in social impact theory.
57
What are the 3 factors that social impact theory believes will increase the likelihood of a person responding to social influence ?
1) Strength
2) immediacy
3) number
58
How does strength increase the likelihood of a person responding to social influence ?
The strength of a source can be determined by stays, authority and age. For example Perrin and Spencer found that probation officers had very high levels of influence of those under probation. This would be explained because they have high levels of authority of those under probation.
59
How does immediacy increase the likelihood of a person responding to social influence ?
immediacy is the distance, in time and space between the source and the target at the time of influence attempt. the smaller the distance the more higher likelihood of social influence the source has on the target.
60
How does number increase the likelihood of a person responding to social influence ?
Number is how many sources and targets there are in a group, the more sources to fewer targets will increase the likelihood of social influence.
61
According to social impact theory when is obedience the greatest ?
obedience will be the greatest to authority figure who are perceived to be legitimate, who are close to the individual and who are great in number. However increasing these factors doesn't continue to increase the likelihood of obedience. for example although increasing the number of sources from 2 to 3 will have a large effect, increasing the number of sources 66 to 67 would have little or no effect of obedience. So strength, immediacy and number can have a multiplication effect on social impact, up to a point. This is referred to as multiplication of impact, where social influence becomes stronger.
62
What is division of impact according to social impact theory ?
Division of impact is where social influence becomes weaker. For example, an authority figure would have a diminished ability to influence somebody if that someone had a group of allies. Evidence for this comes from Milgrams variation studies, where two peers rebel against the instructions of the authority figure telling them to deliver the electric shocks. In this scenario, the presence of the peer lowered the obedience level of participants to just 10%. This demonstrates the divisional effect of one source on many targets.
63
What was the mathematical model formulated by the social impact theory ?
The theory is formulated as a mathematical model i=f(SIN) where i is the magnitude of impact, f is a function, S is the strength of the sources, I is the immediacy of the sources and N is the number sources.
64
What are the strength of social impact theory of as an explanation of obedience ?
1) The theorys use of a mathematical formula makes the theory useful because it can be used to predict how people will behave under certain conditions. This mathematical provides quantitative data which can be objectively applied to a situation, providing the explanation with scientific credibility. Furthermore the theory is reliable if the same measurements are put into a formula, the same predictions will emerge.
2) The theory is supported by research; studies by Asch, Milgram and lateen provide evidence for the impact of strengths, immediacy and number on observable human responses in social situation.
65
What are the weakness of social impact theory of as an explanation of obedience ?
1) A weakness of this theory is that it doesn't explain why people are influenced by others, just under what conditions they are more likely to be influenced. This therefore limits the theories usefulness as it cannot fully explain obedient behaviour.
2) the theory is criticised for being static rather than dynamic, because it does not take into account how the target and source interact with each other. It also ignores what the target brings to the situation.
3) The theory ignores individual differences. For example it doesn't explain why some people are more resistant to social impact and some are affected by it.
66
What are the factors affecting obedience and dissent ?
1) Individual differences in terms of personality and gender.
2) Situational variables
3) Culture
67
What three aspects of personality that affect obedience ?
Personality may cause individual differences in obedience. We look at three aspects of personality
1) Locus of control
2) Authoritarianism
3) Empathy
68
Describe how the personality aspect of locus of control can cause people to be obedient ?
Locus of control can separated into external locos and internal locus. People with an external locus of control believe their behaviour is largely beyond their control, whereas people with an internal locus of control tend to believe that they are responsible for their own actions. This seems consistent with Milgrams research, because many of those who obeyed said that they obeyed because the experimenter had the final responsibility, rather than believing that they themselves were responsible for their own actions. However, research in this area is mixed, with only tentative evidence that those with an internal locus on control resist and those with an external locus of control obey.
69
Describe how the personality aspect of authoritarianism can cause people to be obedient ?
Authoritarian personality is typically submissive to authority, but harsh to those seen as subordinate to themselves. Theodore Adorno constructed a questionnaire known as the F-scale to measure authoritarianism. There are two pieces of evidence supporting the idea that authoritarian personalities are linked to obedience:
1) Milgram and Elms (1966) compared the F-scale scores for 20 obedient and 20 defiant participants involved in Milgram's experiments. They sound that the obedient participant had higher F-scale score, indicating an authoritarian personality type compared to the dissenters. The defiant group on the other hand, showed more social responsibility.
2) Dambrun and Vatine conducted a simulation of Milgram's experiment using a virtual environment/computer simulation. They also found the high authoritarian scores many that the participants were more likely to be obedient.
The increased obedience of those with high authoritarianism scores could be because they are more submissive to authority, or because they wanted to punish the learner.
70
Describe how the personality aspect of empathy can cause people to be obedient ?
Another personality trait which can influence obedience is empathy. It would seem logical that people who have high levels of empathy have high levels of empathy wouldn't be obedient when ordered to harm someone else. Burger (2009) investigated this, and found that, although people who score high on empathy were more likely to protest against giving electric shocks, this did not translate into lower levels of obedience.
71
Describe how gender can effect peoples obedience levels ?
Gender is another form of individual differences which may have an effect on obedience. One might predict that women might be less obedient, because they might be more empathic and therefore less likely to obey humane orders that inflict pain. Or, one might predict women might be more obedient as they are stereotypically more likely to comply with male authority.
72
What evidence has shown that there is no difference in males and females obedience levels ?
Milgram conducted a variation of his experiment with 40 female teachers. He found the they were virtually identical to the male participants in the original study, with an obedience rate of 65% and 27.5% breaking off at the 300volts level. But, their levels of reported anxiety was much higher than those shown in Mae participants. This was also found in Burger's (2009) replication of the study. Similarly, Blass (1999) found that obedience between males and females was consistent across 9 out of 10 obedience studies.
73
What evidence has shown that there is a difference in males and females obedience levels ?
```
When Kilham and Mann (1974) replicated Milgrams study in Australia, they found women were far less obedient (16%) than men (40%). But, this may have been because male teachers were paired with male learners and female teachers were paired with female learners. One explanation for this is that female may have felt solidarity with the female learner and therefore more inclined to disobey the male experimenter.
Nevertheless Blass (1991) used 9 studies to conduct a meta-analysis 9 a study which uses the results from a umber of different studies to come up with an overall set of results). He found that only Kilham and Mann found gender differences.
```
74
What was the overall findings of Genders influence on obedience ?
The overall findings are that gender males no difference to obedience. However, there do seem to be differences in emotional responses of the participants, with females reporting more tension than males.
75
What does Milligrams research tell is about situational variables effect on obedience ?
Milgrams research tells us that situational variables can affect obedience ( and dissent, or resistance to obedience). We know this because aspects such as setting of the experiment, the proximity of the experiment and the authority level of the experimenter affected obedience.
76
What are the 4 situational variables we study that effect obedience levels ?
1) Momentum of compliance
2) Proximity
3) Status of the authority figure
4) Personal responsibility.
77
Describe the situational variable of Momentum of compliance ?
Moment of compliance refers to the concept of an authoritative figure initially making small and trivial requests that do not cause the participant any anxiety. However these initial requests commit the participant to the experiment, so they feel obligated to continue. This is seen is Milgrams initial study as the voltage increases gradually with 15 volt increments.
78
Describe the situational variable of Proximity ?
The closer the authority figure, the higher the level of obedience. However the closer the victim, the lower the obedience. For example in Milgrams study,, if the learner was in the same room as the teacher or if the teacher had to physically place the hand of the learner onto a stick plate, then obedience dropped. But when the learner was in a different room and couldn't be heard or seen at all, obedience rose to 100%. Milgram refers to proximity of the victim as a buffer- it reduces obedience.
79
Describe the situational variable of Status of the authority figure ?
Obedience is strongest when the authority figure is seen to be legitimate and ultimately have power over someone. Evidence of this comes from Milligrams variation studies as obedience increases when experiments were conducted at the prestigious Tale University, and decreased obedience occurred when the experiment was conducted at a less prestigious institution, or when instructions were given by an ordinary man not a high - status researcher.
80
How does the initial aim of milligrams studies link to the effect of culture on obedience ?
Migrams original research was designed to investigate whether there was something unique about German culture which would explain the high levels of obedience shown by concentration camp guards in the Holocaust, or whether people from other cultures would be similarly obedient.
81
Why is it difficult to use Milgrams study to investigate the link of culture on obedience ?
It is difficult to replicate Milgrams study cross-culturally, due to the ethical concerns with the study. This means that its difficult to interpret the findings of studies as it is unclear id the differences in obedience is due to cultural differences, or if they due to methodological differences in the way that the studies were conducted. For example Ancona and Pareyson (1968) conducted a replication of Milligram's study in Italy which gave a higher obedience rate of 80%. This might suggest there are cultural differences that impact levels of obedience. However it could also be due to the fact that their maximum shock rate was 330 volts rather than milligrams 450 volts. It could also be because Ancona and Pareyson used only students as their participants - something which milligram actively avoided since he thought they would be more likely to comply.
82
What evidence suggests that obedience is similar in different cultures ?
A study by Slater (2006) which used a virtual reality replication of Milgram's research (the shocks were given, not to a human being, but to a computer-generated avatar in a visual reality environment. Found similar results to milligrams original study. 73.9% of the participants were obedient and skin conductivity, heart rate and interview responses all indicated that they suffered stress as a result of hurting the avatar. This study was done in a different decade (2006 vs 1963) and country (UK vs US) to Milligrams, thus suggesting that obeisances is similar in different cultures.
A second study by Meeus and Raiijmaker (1986) investigative obedience looked at whether people would obey orders to psychologically harass a job interviewee. This study was conducted in the Netherlands and found that 92% of people were obedient; so once again this study suggest that obedience is similar cross culturally.
Blass (2012) reviewed studies don in the US elsewhere including India, Austria, Italy, South Africa, Puerto Rico, Scotland, Holland and Canada. Blass found that obedience levels in the US of 60.94% and 65.94% elsewhere. The average figures are very similar to Milligram's results, and are also similar cross culturally. Blass concludes that this similarity across cultures suggests that people tend to obey authority, and says that this may be "one of the universals of social behaviour".
83
What research shows their to be differences in obedience levels between cultures ?
Some studies show a higher level of obedience than Milgrams; for example Schurz (1985) carried out a study in Austria where obedience level was 80%. Participants were told to give burst of ultrasound rather than electricity to a learner, and were told that the bursts were painful and could damage the skin.
84
What does developmental psychology suggest about gender and obedience levels ?
Developmental psychology might predict that that women would b more compliant, because according to gender role schemas, they have been socialised to be quiet and compliment.
85
What does developmental psychology suggest about culture and obedience levels ?
Developmental psychology might also predict that we are shaped culture in which we grow up. For example, children growing up in an individualistic culture where independence is valued might be more likely to be obedient than a child growing up up in a collectivist culture, where independence is less valued and people work as a cooperative group. An example of culture with an individualistic culture would be the USA and example of a collectivist culture would be China.
86
Who conducted your Contemporary study for Social psychology, when did they conduct and what was the title of the study ?
Jerry Burger conducted the contemporary study for social psychology in 2009 titled replicating Milgram: would people still obey today ?
87
What is the aim of Burgers contemporary study ?
The aim of Burger's study was partially replicate Milgram's study. This would allow comparisons with the original study, so that it would be possible to find out whether current levels of obedience were different to levels of obedience from Milgrams studies 45 years earlier.
Burger also aimed to protect participants - unlike Milfrmas original study which was very controversial due to it participants be subjected to high levels of stress. Burger came up with a solution to these ethical concerns which would allow the study to be partially replicated.
88
How was participants recruited ?
Participants responded to advertisement. Flyers were placed in a local paper, online and in local establishments such as libraries and businesses. Participants were told they would be given $50 for taking part.
89
What screening process did participants complete before partaking in the study ?
Participants who had studied more than two psychology classes at university were excluded from the study, in order to ensure that no participants who were familiar with milligrams original study took part. This was to control the extraneous variable of demand characteristics and socially desirable responses because if participants knew of Milligrams original study they may have changed their behaviour.
The remaining participants were asked about their physical and psychological health and whether they had suffered from any traumatic childhood experiences. 30% of the participants were excluded on this basis
A second second screening process was led by two clinical psychologists. Participants were asked to complete a number of scales and questionnaires. These included a demographic sheet asking about age, occupation, education and ethnicity: the Interpersonal reactivity Index (which measures empathy ): the Beck Anxiety Inventory: the Desirability of Control Scale and Beck Depression Inventory.
Participants were then interviewed by a clinical psychologist, who used a structured interview: the Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview ( also known as MINI) to identify anyone who might negatively affected by the study. 123 people were interviewed: 47 (38.3%) were excluded from the study (although they received their $50)
90
How did Burger make the study more ethical than Miligram's original study ?
The two-step screening process improves the ethics of Milligram's original study, as it removes participants who are likely to suffer most stress during the study. Participants were also told at least three times (twice in writing) that they could withdraw from the study at any time and still keep their $50. The experimenter in Burger's study was also a clinical psychologist who was instructed to end the study immediately if he saw any signs of excessive stress. The procedures were also approved by Santa Clara University Review board.
91
What was the final sample for Burgers contemporary study ?
Of the 76 remaining participants, six dropped out. Five of these indicated that they were aware of Milligram's original research.
The final sample was therefore made up of 70 people: 29 males and 41 females. They ranged in age from 20-81 years old with a mean age of 42.9
92
How many experiments made up Burgers study and what were they titles ?
Burger completed two studies.
Experiment One: The Baseline Condition
Experiment Two: Model Refusal Condition
93
Describe the procedure of Burgers experiment one baseline condition ?
Participants were split into two groups, to keep the ratios of each gender the same. Each participant was introduced to the experimenter and the confederate, and was given $50. They were told that they could keep this even if they chose withdraw from the study. The experimenter and the confederate had been chosen to look similar to those used in Milligram's original study. Burger explained they study in the same way Milgram had, telling the participants that the study was to investigate the effect of punishment on memory, and explaining that a shock machine would be used. A in Milgram's study, the confederate and participant drew lots, but the lots were rigged so that the participant was the teacher. Both people were then asked to sign consent forms.
Just as in Milligram's study, the learner was put into an adjacent room. The teacher witnessed the experimenter putting an electrode onto the learner's wrist and explains that the paste used 'would prevent blisters or burns"
Staying with Milligram's procedure, the teacher was asked to read out a list of 25 word pairs. The teacher was told that if the learner got an answer wrong, he should administer an electric shock. Each subsequent wrong answer would result in a stronger shock being administered. At this point, the confederate revealed that he had a heart problem.
The teacher was then shown how to use the shock machine, and given sample 15 volt shock. This is different to the more intense, 45 volts shock that Milgram had used. Burger used the same four verbal prods that Milgram has used. As Milgram's study pre-recorded voice feedback grunts from the learner were audible from 75 volts level. At 150 volts, the learner "Ugh. That's all. Get me out of here, please. My heart's starting to bother me. I refuse to go on. Let me out!" this was the. original study go Milgram's variation 5 ( not the variation we study ).
At this point, and after the experimenter used the verbal prods, if the teacher was resistant to continuing, the experiment was ended. The experiment was also ended at the point the researcher read out loud the next instruction following the administration of the 150 volt shock. On finishing the experiment , the experimenter immediately admitted to the teacher that the shocks were not real and the teacher was introduced to the learner to ensure that they knew he was not harmed in any way. This was different to Milligram's original study, where debriefing did not take place immediately, and is another improvement to the ethics of the study.
94
Why did Burger believe that stopping 150 volts wouldn't affect the validity of the results ?
Burger noticed that 79% of people who continued past 150 volts went all the to the end of the shock generators range (450 volts). This suggests that knowing what people do at the 150 volts level allows us to predict what they would do if allowed to continue to the end. Burger points out that stopping the study within seconds after the participants decided whether or not to continue at the 150 volt mark avoids exposing them to the extreme stress which Miligrams's participants experienced in the later parts of the procedure.
95
What was the aim of Burger experiment two: modelled refusal condition ?
The aim of Burgers second experiment the modelled refusal condition was to see if people would be less likely to be obedient if there was social support for the idea of exiting the study sooner. The study was designed to comply with current ethical guidelines.
96
What was the procedure of Burger experiment two: modelled refusal condition ?
Most of the procedure of Burgers second experiment the modelled refusal condition in this variation was identical that used in the baseline condition. However, there were some differences. The main difference lay in the fact that two confederates were used instead of one. the second confederate posed as a participant, and the second was the same gender as the real participant. After the rigged drawing of roles Teacher 1 (a confederate) took the lead and began asking the questions and administering shock while teacher two ( the participant) sat with them. At 75 volts, as striped, the learner grunted. At this stage, Teacher 1 ( the confederate) hesitated. At 90 volts, Teacher 1 said "I don't know about this". Teacher 1 was then prompted by the experimenter by saying "please continue", but refused to carry on and pushed their hair back from the table. The experimenter then asked Teacher 2 (the real participant) to continue.
97
What were the results from Burger first experiment, the baseline condition ?
The number of participants who stopped at 150 volts or earlier was 12 out of 40 (30%) 6 of which were male and 6 were female.
The number of participants who were prepared to continue past 150 volts was 28 out of 40 (70%) 12 of which are male and 16 were female.
In Milgrams original study, 82.5% of participants continued past 150 volts - so the results from Burgers baseline experiment are similar to Milligram's.
98
What were the results from Burger second experiment, the modelled refusal condition ?
The number of participants who stopped at 150 volts or earlier was 11 out of 30 (37%) 5 of which were male and 6 of which were female.
The number of participants who were prepared to continue past 150 volts was 19 out of 30 (63%) 6 of which were male and 13 were female.
In Milgrams original study, 82.5% of participants continued past 150 volts - The results from the Modelled Refusal condition are also surprisingly similar to both Milgrams original study and baseline condition.
99
What were the overall results from Burgers study ?
The study found that there was no statistical difference between the two conditions contrary to Burger's prediction that modelled refusal would decrease obedience.
Nor was there statistical difference between Burger's Baseline condition and the similar condition in Milgram's study.
100
What was the conclusions of Burgers study ?
1) Results found in both experiments similar results to Milligrams research found over 45 years ago. Time and changes in society did not have an effect on obedience levels.
2) Seeing refusal to obey modelled also did not effect obedience
3) There were no significant gender differences.
4) Lack of empathy did not explain obedience.
101
What were the conclusions from Burger's study on the individual difference of gender ?
There was no statistical difference in obedience level according to gender in Burger's two experiments. The point at which male and female participants need the first prod was also similar.
102
What were the conclusions from Burger's study on the individual difference of personality ?
Milgram had suggested that an explanation of obedience in his original study might lie in a lack of empathy in the participants. Burger found that participants who were high in empathy expressed a reluctance to continue the procedure earlier than those who were low in empathic concern. However, this did not translate into grater likelihood of refusing to obey. However Burger did not find a correlation between empathy scores (assessing during the screening process) and obedience.
Burger had thought that a high desire for control (assessed during screening) would decrease obedience, because participants would be more likely to act on their own feelings rather than obeying the experimenter. However this effect was only shown in the baseline condition. Ut seems that the presence of the dissenting model reduced this effect. This may be because the base condition may have represented a me-vs-him situation which triggered the participants' wish to take control. So it seems that relationship between personality and obedience is complicated, and needs further investigation.
103
How generalisable is Burger's Contemporary study ?
Burgers study consisted of a sample with a large age range of 20-81 years old which including both males and females and a range of occupation and ethnicity. As well as the placement of advertisement in a variety of places including online, local businesses and local establishments.
However the study only took place in America and the two-step screening process meant that a proportion of the original sample were excluded from the study meaning that the sample not be representative of the wider population. Furthermore the use of a volunteer sample makes the sample unrepresentative as people with a certain personality types are more likely to volunteer to take part in a psychology study.
104
How reliable is Burger's Contemporary study ?
Burger study used standardised procedures the same as Milgram did so it can be replicated in a consistent away for every participant and future research which is a strength of his study. These standardised procedures included scripted responses fro learner and the use of standardised prods from the experimenter.
105
How applicable is Burger's Contemporary study ?
Burger's not only showed that people are obedient to inhumane orders it also shows that obedience hasn't changed since Milgrams original study over 45 years ago. This knowledge indicates that events such as the holocaust could occur again and that processes may need to be developed systems to prevent events like this from occurring.
Furthermore the study shows that psychological research can be conducted in an ethical way which is very useful for supporting the argument of psychology as a science.
106
How valid is Burger's Contemporary study ?
The study could be deemed to have high internal validity because the use of strict controls to ensure clear cause and effect links can be established for example excluding any who had taken two or psychology classes at university to ensure socially desired behaviour or demand characteristics due to being aware of Miligrams studies.
Furthermore the study has high experimenter realism as participants believed it was real and therefore they acted accurate to real life.
However the study could be believed to low ecological validity because the the setting of a laboratory study and the task of giving electric shocks were artificial meaning its not representative of real life; reducing the accuracy of the behaviour displaced.
107
How ethical is Burger's Contemporary study ?
Burger's Contemporary study is considered to be ethically sound due to many improvements Burger made to Milligrams original study these include:
1) a two step screening process to protect any participants who may experience extreme anxiety during the study.
2) Participants were told twice that could verbally and once in writing that they had the right to withdraw.
3) participants were required to sign a consent form.
4) Participants were monitored closely to ensure that if participants showed an excessive amount of stress they were instructed to stop the study,
5)the example shock given to the teacher was reduced 15 volts from 45 volts.
6) the experiment was stopped at 150 volts even if the participant was prepared to continue past this point.
7) participants were immediately debriefed and informed that the learner didn't experience any pain.
Due to all this ethical considerations approved by Santa Clara University review board.
