Obedience - MILGRAM Flashcards
when was milgram’s study?
1963
method
- volunteer sample of 40 male participants
- issued what they thought was an electric shock when learner was wrong
- an ‘experimenter’ was supervising dressed in a lab coat
results
- 100% reached 300V
- 65% reached 450V
qualitative data
- seemed to sweat, tremble, stutter, groan
- 3 had ‘full-blown uncontrollable seizures’
conclusion
- american Ps were willing to obey orders even when they might harm someone
EVALUATION - positive
RESEARCH SUPPORT
- replicated in a french docu about reality TV
- believed they were contestants in a pilot for ‘a game of death’
- paid to give shocks to other Ps in front of an audience
- 80% = 460V
EVALUATION - al-
ALTERNATE VIEW
- haslam et al (2014) = found Ps disobeyed on ‘you have no other choice, you must go on’ but were ok with ‘the experiment requires that you continue’
- SIT may be more valid
EVALUATION - lo-
LOW INTERNAL VALIDITY
- 75% believed shocks were real
- orne & holland = Ps didn’t believe & were play acting
COUNTER
- sheridan & king (1972) = students gave real shocks to a puppy when ordered
- 100% women gave what they thought was a fatal shock
if someone else administered the shock
92%
milgram’s original
65%
moved to a rundown office building
47.5%
teacher & learner in same room
40%
teacher had to force learner’s hand onto a shock plate
30%
experimenter gave instructions to the teacher by phone
20%
participants worked in groups to shock the learner (2 rebelled & refused to go on)
10%
situational variables affecting obedience
- proximity
- location
- uniform
explanation for proximity affecting obedience
decreased proximity allows people to psychologically distance themselves from the consequences of their actions
explanation for location affecting conformity
baseline location (yale) gave the experiment legitimacy & authority
explanation for uniform affecting conformity
they are widely recognised symbols of authority who are entitled to expect obedience
EVALUATION - situational variables for uniform
RESEARCH SUPPORT
- bickman (1974) = 3 people dressed as a member of the public, milkman’s outfit & security guard
- 2X more likely to obey guard than M.O.P
EVALUATION - situational variables for proximity
CROSS CULTURAL REPLICATIONS
- meeus & raaijmakers (1986) = dutch Ps ordered to say stressful things in an interview to a confederate desperate for a job - 90% obeyed
- when orderer wasn’t present this decreased lots
EVALUATION - negative
LOW INTERNAL VALIDITY
- Ps may have been aware the procedure was faked, especially in the M.O.P scenario
- demand characteristics
