Obedience-Milgram Flashcards
Outline procedure of Milgram’s baseline obedience study (1963)
- naive participant = teacher (fixed that way)
- 2 confederates = learner- Mr Wallace and experiment - wearing grey lab coat
- At Yale university
- participant told it was a study on memory and would administer (fake) shocks to the learner everytime he gave an incorrect answer from word lists he had to remember
- shocks started from 15 volts (labelled slight shock) to 450 volts (severe shock) and increased every wrong answer
- at 300 volts the learner banged on the wall and asked to stop and at 315 volts banged on the wall then went silent- participant told “an absence of response should be treated as a wrong answer”
Findings of Milgram’s baseline study
-Every participant administered 300 volt shocks
-65% went to 450 volts
-Milgram also collected qualitative data such as the participants used to sweat,tremble and groan
What did the 14 psychology students think would be the results?
-When milgram asked the psychology students they thought no more than 3% would deliver 450 volt shocks : people more obedient than they realise
Strengths of milgrams baseline study
Research support: Beauvois et al. (2012)replication of the study for french gameshow - The game of Death. 80% of participants administered 460 volts to seemingly unconscious man in front of confederate audience. Behaviour was also identical to that of milgram’s (nail biting, anxious laughter). Supports milgrams research
Weaknesses of Milgram’s study
Low internal validity:Milgram said that 75% of his participants thought the shocks were real. Martin Horne and Holland (1968) argued Participants are said to have guessed it was fake and Gina Perry (2013) listened to the tapes and only half believed the shocks were real and that 2/3rds of the 50% were disobedient. Therefore participants were subject to demand characteristics.
However, King and Sheridan did a milgram-like study with dogs where the participants gave real shocks, Nevertheless, 54% of men and 100% of women gave what thought to be real shocks.
Ethically poor:There was deception and harm to the participants.
-Alternative interpretation to findings: Milgram’s assertions of blind obedience may not be justified. Haslam found that all participants obeyed when experimenter gave first 3 verbal encouragements to participant to continue but every participant who heard the 4th disobeyed “You have no choice you must carry on). According to Social identity theory (SIT) participants in Milgram’s study only obeyed when they identified with the scientific aims of the study. WHen they were ordered blindly to obey authority figure they did not. Therefore, SIT may offer a more credible explanation for milgram’s findings.
What were the variations in Milgram’s study
-Uniform
- Location:
-Proximity:
What did Obedience fall to when experimenter was member of the public with everyday clothes on?
obedience fell to 20% when the experimenter was member of the public not wearing grey lab coat
What did obedience fall to when the experiment was in a run down office building?
run down office building = obedience dropped to 47.5%
What did obedience drop to when a) experimenter gave orders by telephone and b) when teacher and learner were in the same room?
a) 20.5% when the experimenter gave orders by telephone
b)40% when teacher and learner were in the same room.
Strengths of Milgrams situational variables study?
-Research support: In a field study, Bickman had 3 confederates dress in different outfits - jacket and tie, a milkman’s outfit and a security guard’s uniform. The confederates individually stood in street and told people to perform tasks such as pick up the litter. People were twice as obedient to obey the person dresses in the security guard outfit than the jacket and tie. Therefore supports that uniform has a powerful effect.
-Cross-cultural replications: Meeus and Raaijmakers used a more realistic procedure than Milgram to study obedience in dutch participants. The participants were ordered to say stressful things in an interview to someone (a confederate) desperate for a job. 90% of participants obeyed and replicated milgram’s findings with proximity and obedience dropped when the person giving order was not present. Therefore, findings are not just limited to American men.
However, Smith and bond identified only two replications between 1968 and 1985 in India and Jordan which are culturally differnet to other countries involved. Therefore may not be appropriate to conclude all of Milgram’s finding’s apply to all cultures
Weakness of Milgram’s situation variables study
Low internal validity: participants may have known the procedure was faked.
Orne and Holland point out that it is more likely in his variations because of the extra manipulation of variables - obvious in the variation where experimenter was member of the public. Therefore unclear in all of Milgram’s study whether participants responded to demand characteristics
