Obedience: Milgram's variation studies

Question 1

What was the procedure and findings for experiment 10: run down office block?
3

Answer 1

• Rundown office block (Bridgeport)
• Prestigious uni setting = trust competence of exprmtr
• Ppt were told run by pvt firm, 47.5% ppt fully obedient

Question 2

What was the procedure and findings of experiment 7: telephonic instructions?
4

Answer 2

• Experimenter gave orders over phone
• 22.5% fully obedient
• Ppt lied on phone, said ^shock lvl when they weren’t
• Researcher back in room = defiant became obedient

Question 3

What was the procedure and findings in experiment 13: ordinary man gives orders?
4

Answer 3

• Teacher observes Wallace being strapped into chair
• Experimenter fake phone call (gone)
• Actor recorder suggests to administer shocks (^15v)
• 80% ppt refused to continue

Question 4

Evaluate Milgram’s variation studies

3

Answer 4

Exp.7 = ^ext reliability. Sedikides and Jackson found when authority figure isn’t present, obedience drops

Exp.10 = ^applicable. Rochat reanalysed interview transcripts (36/40), earlier ppt challenged exprmtr = ^likely fully defiant. Qual data = explain ‘ordinariness of goodness’ (people rescued victims during Holocaust)

Exp.13 >int validity. Milgram said withdrawal of the exprmtr was awkward. Traces of ‘derived authority’ as the exprmtr had described study/idea of administering shocks