Obedience: Milgrams research

Question 1

Milgrams study

aim

Answer 1

Aim: Milgram (1963)- why Germans followed Hitler and committed mass genocide in the Holocaust in WW2

Question 2

Milgrams study

procedure

Answer 2

└40 male participants- newspapers- for “memory study” labs study
└20-50 years old
└range of jobs
└$4.50 to take part
└rigged draw:
└Mr Wallace (confederate)= learner
└participant= teacher
└confederate in lab coat= experimenter
└learner given shocks if incorrect on memory test- in other room
└shock level 13 (slight shock)- 450 (danger)
└300V- pound wall, 350V pound wall then no response
Standard prods:
└please go on, you must continue, you have no other choice-you must go on

Question 3

Milgrams study

findings

Answer 3

└no participants stopped below 300V
└5 participants stopped AT 300V
└65% went to 450V
└qualitative data- participants sweat, trembled, groaned (3= seizures)
└findings not expected (expected only 3% to go to 450V)
└ participants debriefed
└84% glad to have participated

Question 4

Obedience research

Person

Answer 4

Milgram (1963)

Question 5

Obedience: Milgrams research
Strengths
Summary

Answer 5

Good external validity- Hofling et al (1966), nurses

High internal validity - sheridan and king (1972), puppies/ Milgram,
shocks

Supporting replication- French: the game of death documentary(2010)

Question 6

Obedience: Milgrams research
Strengths
Good external validity

Answer 6

└lab environment reflected wider authority relationships in real life (Milgram)
└Hofling et al (1966)- 21/22 nurses obey doctors unjustified demands
└can be generalised

Question 7

Obedience: Milgrams research
Strengths
High internal validity

Answer 7

└sheridan and king (1972)- real shocks given to a puppy
└54% male /100% female gave “fatal” shock
└acted same way with real shock= increase validity

└Milgram= 70% thought shocks were genuine

Question 8

Obedience: Milgrams research
Strengths
Supporting replication

Answer 8

└French: the game of death documentary(2010)- replication of Milgrams study
└though was a game show- give electric shocks to participants (actors) when ardered by presentor in front of audience
└80%= max shock of 460V (to an unconscious man)
└same behaviour- e.g. nail biting
└=findings repeatable

Question 9

Obedience: Milgrams research
Limitations
Summary

Answer 9

Low internal validity - Orne and Holland (1968), not real shocks/ Gina perry (2013), tapes

Ethical issues - Diana Baumrind (1964), deception/ right to withdraw

Question 10

Obedience: Milgrams research
Limitations
Low internal validity

Answer 10

└Orne and Holland (1968)- participants guessed it wasn’t real shocks
└Gina perry (2013)- listened to tapes of Milgrams participants doubting shocks
└ =low internal validity

Question 11

Obedience: Milgrams research
Limitations
Ethical issues

Answer 11

└Diana Baumrind (1964)- critical of deception
└rigged role allocation
└thought shocks were real
└could damage psychologists reputation
└right to withdraw- difficult due to prompts
└though 35% did successfully withdraw