Obedience: Milgram

Question 1

What is obedience?

Answer 1

A form of social influence in which an individual follows a direct order.

Question 2

When did Milgram conduct the original obedience study?

Answer 2

1963

Question 3

How many participants took part in Milgram’s original study and how did he obtain these participants?

Answer 3

He recruited 40 male participants (aged 20-50) through newspaper adverts and flyers in the post.

Question 4

How did Milgram deceive the participants before the study even started?

Answer 4

He advertised for participants to use in a memory study, when the study was not about memory at all.

Question 5

How did Milgram incentivise the participants to take part in the study?

Answer 5

He offered them $4.50 to take part (a reasonable amount in the early 1960’s).

Question 6

What inspired Milgram to conduct his study?

Answer 6

To find out why German’s followed the orders of Hitler and slaughtered over 10 million Jews, Gypsies and others during the Holocaust in WW2.

Question 7

Explain how the participants were assigned roles during the experiment?

Answer 7

The draw was rigged so when they arrived at the lab they were always assigned as the ‘teacher’ and the confederate ‘Mr Wallis’ was always assigned the learner.

Question 8

Who was the ‘experimenter’ and what was their role in the study?

Answer 8

It was another confederate (not Milgram!) who was dressed in a lab coat, told participants they could leave at any time but also used ‘prods’ to encourage them to continue.

Question 9

What did the ‘teacher’ have to do during the experiment?

Answer 9

They had to deliver increasingly severe electric shocks when the ‘learner’ made a mistake on a learning task, (the shocks were not real).

Question 10

What were the ‘prods’ designed to do?

Answer 10

They were designed to encourage the ‘teacher’ to continue when they were unsure about continuing.

Question 11

Milgram found that no participants stopped below what Voltage?

Answer 11

300 Volts (‘intense shock’).

Question 12

Who was ‘Mr Wallace’?

Answer 12

The confederate who always ended up as the ‘learner’ who was punished by the participant.

Question 13

What percentage of participants continued to the highest level of 450 Volts (‘danger - severe shock)?

Answer 13

65%.

Question 14

What was the initial shock administered by the ‘teacher’?

Answer 14

15 Volts.

Question 15

What type of data was collected from the study?

Answer 15

Both quantitative and qualitative data.

Question 16

Who gave the participant prods during the experiment?

Answer 16

The experimenter (a confederate actor).

Question 17

Who was the authority figure in the study?

Answer 17

The ‘experimenter’

Question 18

What was the Voltage range?

Answer 18

15V to 450V.

Question 19

The majority of participants reached what Voltage before stopping?

Answer 19

Trick question - 65% of participants delivered the full shock of 450V.

Question 20

What happened to participants after the experiment?

Answer 20

They were debriefed and sent a follow-up questionnaire.

Question 21

Prior to the study, Milgram asked 14 psychology students to predict the results of the study, did the findings support or oppose the students?

Answer 21

Completely opposed, the students thought no more than 3% of participants would continue to 450V when the study found 65% did.

Question 22

Describe what qualitative data was collected from the study:

Answer 22

Observations of extreme tension and stress ‘sweat, trembling, stutters, lip-biting, groaning, digging their fingernails into their hands, etc.’

Question 23

Where did Milgram carry out the experiment?

Answer 23

At Yale University.

Question 24

By what increments did the Voltage increase by in the study?

Answer 24

15V increments.

Question 25

What was the ‘experimenter’ wearing during the experiment?

Answer 25

A grey lab coat.

Question 26

The study caused great stress in the participants, what was recorded about three participants?

Answer 26

Three participants had ‘full-blown uncontrollable seizures’.

Question 27

What was ‘Mr Wallace’s’ role in the study?

Answer 27

He answered questions from the teacher, mainly incorrectly, and received fake electric shocks. He began to beg the ‘teacher’ to stop giving him shocks.

Question 28

AO3 - Low internal validity.

Answer 28

Orne and Holland (1968) argued the participants realised the shocks were not real and Milgram was therefore lacking internal validity in his study. This was also supported by Gina Perry (2013) who reported many participants expressed doubts about the reality of the shocks.

Question 29

How was qualitative data collected?

Answer 29

Observations.

Question 30

What type of study was Milgrams? (lab, field, quasi, natural)

Answer 30

Lab experiment, the variables were highly controlled.

Question 31

A03 - Androcentrism.

Answer 31

Milgram’s study consisted of only male participants between 20 and 50 years old, this means the study was androcentric and lacks generalisation to the wider population.

Question 32

What A03 comments have been made about the internal validity of the study?

Answer 32

+ Milgram reported 70% of participant believed shocks were genuine.
+ Sheridan and King (1972) conducted a similar experiment with real shocks on a puppy and found 54 of males and 100% of females delivered what they thought was a fatal shock.
- Orne and Holland (1968) argued participants realised shocks were fake.
- Gina Perry (2013) listened to tapes and reported participants expressing doubts about the shocks realness.

Question 33

What did Orne and Holland (1968) argue?

Answer 33

That participants realised the shocks were not real and the study therefore lacked internal validity. This was also supported by Gina Perry (2013) who reported many participants expressed doubts about the reality of the shocks.

Question 34

What did Milgram say about the internal validity of his study?

Answer 34

He reported that 70% of his participants said they believed the shocks were genuine.

Question 35

Who opposed Orne and Hollands argument?

Answer 35

Sheridan and King (1972), they conducted a similar study where real shocks were given to a puppy. Despite the real shocks, 54% of males and 100% of females delivered what they thought was a fatal shock.

Question 36

Part of Milgram’s debrief was a structured interview, what did he find in this?

Answer 36

84% of participants reported they felt glad to have participated in the study.

Question 37

Explain the reasoning for the results found by Sheridan and King (1972):

Answer 37

They found that women were much more obedient, this is likely because the American culture in those days was that women should be attentive etc.

Question 38

Who supported Orne and Hollands argument about low internal validity?

Answer 38

Gina Perry (2013), who reported many participants expressed doubts about the reality of the shocks.

Question 39

What did Milgram conclude from his study?

Answer 39

Ordinary people are likely to follow orders given by an authority figure, to a high extent and obedience is ingrained in us all through socialisation (growing up).

Question 40

AO3 - External validity.

Answer 40

The study appears to have low external validity,
however, the experiment accurately reflects real-life institutions such as the military, school etc. This is supported by Hofling (1966) who studied nurses on a ward who delivered unjustified demands when asked to.

Question 41

What does Hofling (1966) have to do with external validity?

Answer 41

He conducted a study of nurses on a hospital ward and found high levels of obedience to unjustified demands by doctors, (21 out of 22 obeyed), suggesting the results can be generalised and the study has high external validity.

Question 42

Describe the validity of Milgrams study:

Answer 42

Internal = mixed findings,
External = high validity.

Question 43

AO3 - Supporting replication.

Answer 43

The game of death, a reality TV show on French television in 2010. It was a replication of the study and contestants gave (fake) electric shocks to other participants in-front of an audience when asked to by a presenter. 80% of participants delivered a maximum shock of 460V to an ‘unconscious’ man.
This demonstrates that Milgram’s findings where not just a ‘one-off’ chance occurrence.

Question 44

AO3 - Social identity theory.

Answer 44

The SIT says the key to obedience is group identification, in Milgram’s study the participants identified with the experimenter due the common aims of scientific advancement. Low obedience showed they identified more with the victim than the science (experimenter).

Question 45

AO3 - Ethical issues.

Answer 45

Diana Baumrind (1964) was very critical of Milgram’s deception. He led participants to think allocation of roles was random when it was in fact fixed, he also made them believe the shocks were real and that the study was about memory rather than obedience.

Question 46

What was Le Jeu De la Mort?

Answer 46

The game of death, a reality TV show on French television in 2010. It was a replication of the study and contestants gave (fake) electric shocks to other participants in-front of an audience when asked to by a presenter. 80% of participants delivered a maximum shock of 460V to an ‘unconscious’ man.