Obedience: Milgram's Variations

Question 1

How does the aim differ from the original in the ‘ordinary man gives orders’ variation?

Answer 1

To investigate the impact on obedience when the authority of the experimenter was removed by presenting him as an ordinary person (with no lab coat).

Question 2

What was the sample of the ordinary man variation?

Answer 2

20 ppts

Question 3

Briefly describe the procedure of the ordinary man variation.

Answer 3

• There is a teacher and learner (the first confederate) as in the original but the experimenter does not tell the teacher to increase the voltage
• A rigged phone call then calls the experimenter away and he acts eager to leave but tells the others to continue
• The confederate timing things then announces he has a good idea, to increase the level of shocks by 15V for every wrong answer

Question 4

What were the results of the ordinary man and experiment 13 variation?

Answer 4

• 16/20 left the experiment (80%)

- The 16 in the new situation would protest against the confederates actions, 5 used physical means

Question 5

Describe the procedure of ‘experiment 13a’.

Answer 5

• The 16 who left were then put into a new situation
• The confederate who timed would appear to be disgusted if they left and he would personally take over the shocks to see how ppts reacted

Question 6

What can we conclude from the ordinary man variation?

Answer 6

When the authority figure is taken away, people are more likely to disobey (especially if the person isn’t legitimate in power).
- this is an important situational factor which can encourage obedience

Question 7

How does the aim differ from the original in the ‘telephonic instructions’ variation?
Variation 7

Answer 7

To investigate level of obedience when the experimenter isn’t present due to giving instructions over a phone.

Question 8

What was the sample of the telephonic instructions variation?

Answer 8

40 males

Question 9

Briefly describe the procedure of the telephonic instructions variation.

Answer 9

• After giving the initial instructions of the original experiment, they left and gave the rest of the instructions over the phone
• Only reappeared when the ppts disobeyed

Question 10

What were the results of the telephonic instructions variation?

Answer 10

• 22.5% continued to 450V

- Some ppts lied about giving higher shocks as assumed no one would know

Question 11

What can we conclude from the telephonic instructions variation?

Answer 11

Lower obedience levels due to lack of experimenter and so stress/pressure from being watched.
When researchers came back in the room, defiant ppts become obedient again

Question 12

How does the aim differ from the original in the ‘run down office block’ variation?
Variation 10

Answer 12

To investigate level of obedience in relation to the setting that the orders from authority are being given.

Question 13

What was the sample of the office block variation?

Answer 13

40 males

Question 14

Briefly describe the procedure of the office block variation.

Answer 14

The procedure that was carried out in the original study was replicated exactly.

Question 15

What were the results of the office block variation?

Answer 15

• 47.5% continued to 450V

- 2 ppts refused to give the lowest shock and were sceptical of the experimenter’s motive

Question 16

What can we conclude from the office block variation?

Answer 16

• prestigious context is an important situational factor that affects levels of obedience
• shabby settings reduce the legitimacy of the researcher
• however, the link to scientific research seemed to be enough to still encourage relatively high levels of obedience

Question 17

Why did Milgram carry out the other variations of his experiment?

Answer 17

To show situational factors also have an affect on the levels of obedience