Obedience - Milgram's Baseline Study + Others

Question 1

APFC

Answer 1

A - To understand German behaviour in the Holocaust
P - 40 men, aged 20-50, Experimenter (Mr Williams) & Learner (Mr Wallace), ‘Teacher’ gave shock to ‘Learner’ for every wrong answer, ranging from 15V to 450V (Fake 45V given to trick teacher), at 300V pounding on wall, no sound after 315V, Standardised prompts (1. Please continue 2. The experiment requires that you continue 3. It is absolutely essential you continue 4. You have no other choice, you must go on, could leave after 3)
F - 65% gave 450V, 100% gave 300V and 12.5% dropped out after this
C - Very obedient // Perceived reputation of researcher and setting (Yale), furthering Science

Question 2

GRAVE

Answer 2

G - old sample size. Only done on men from new New York, not generalisable to women or different cultures
R - Repeated by Burger w similar results in a different time period (2009). 70% continued after 150V, similar to on Milgram’s
A - Improved pilot training // Tarnow (2000) - first officers fail to state errors made by the captain due to authority // Training them to challenge could prevent 20% of plane crashes
V - Gina Perry (2012) // Experimenter varied from script and gave as many as 20 prompts at one point, 60% disobeyed over all studies // Orne & Holland (1968) // Ppts. knew it wasn’t real but went along anyway, must’ve found it odd that Experimenter didn’t give shocks themselves and that they felt so little concern, Film footage supports this, as does Perry (2012)
E - Short debrief & could’ve caused trauma

Question 3

Conclusion

Answer 3

The applications of his work have contributed hugely in society (military, pilots etc.), however he had little regard for ethical guidelines and recent research has highlighted that the study may have more worrying flaws than previously thought.

Question 4

Experiment 10

3

Answer 4

Rundown office block in Bridgeport

Office block had 3 rooms and was scarcely furnished

Ppts. told the study was for a private company

Obedience drops to 45%

Strength - Used quantitative and qualitative (through audio recordings), which were then used by Modigliani & Rochat (1995) to find out that the earlier the ppt. challenged the interviewer, the more likely they were to be defiant

Question 5

Experiment 7

4

Answer 5

Experiementer gives instructions then leaves the room

Teacher left alone w telephone

Prods given through the phone

Obedience drops to 22.5%, some gave lower shocks than were told to

Strength - Sedikedes & Jackson’s Zoo study gives similar results, with obedience falling when told to stop leaning in adjacent room

Question 6

Experiment 13

3

Answer 6

Mr William leaves before he can explain 15V increments

2nd confederate suggests new way ‘15V for every mistake’

Obedience falls to 20%

Weakness - Lacks internal validity. Milgram said it was the experimenter who described the study, thus resulting in ‘derived authority’. Thus obedience may be lower if orders given by someone completely unrelated