obedience: situational variables Flashcards
what are situational variables?
In Milgram’s study, situational variables are several factors that influenced the level of obedience shown by ppts. They are related to the external environment rather than the personalities of the people involved.
what are the 3 situation variables in Milgram’s study?
proximity, location and uniform.
what is proximity?
proximity refers to the physical closeness or distance of an authority figure to the person that they are giving an order to.
what is location?
the place where an order is issued.
the status or prestige of the location influences obedience.
what is uniform?
people in positions of power often have a specific outfit that is symbolic of their authority.
this indicates to the rest of us who is entitled to our obedience.
what happened to the rate of obedience when the learner and the teacher were in the same room?
obedience levels dropped from 65% to 40%
what happened to the rate of obedience when the teacher had to force the learners hand onto an ‘electroshock plate’ when the learner refused to answer a question?
obedience dropped to 30%
what happened to the rate of obedience when the experimenter left the room and gave instructions to the teacher via telephone?
obedience levels dropped to 20.5%. The ppts also gave fewer and weaker shocks than they were supposed to.
what happened to the level of obedience when Milgram changed the location of the study so that it was conducted in a run-down building rather than the prestigious university building?
obedience levels fell to 47.5%
what happened when the experimenter was replaced by an ‘ordinary member of the public’ rather than the experimenter who wore a lab coat?
obedience levels dropped to 20% which is the lowest of any of the variations.
AO3 - who conducted research support in NYC for Milgram’s variations?
What was said research about?
Bickman (1974)
3 confederates all dressed in different outfits - jacket and tie, milkman’s outfit, security guard’s uniform.
Confederates stood in the street and asked passers-by to perform tasks such as picking up litter or giving the confedearte a coin for a parking meter.
what did the study by Bickman (1974) find during their study?
Bickman found that people were twice as likely to obey the assistant dressed as a security guard than the one dressed in a jacket and tie.
This supports Milgram’s conclusion that a uniform conveys the authority of its wearer and is a situational factor likely to produce obedience.
What is a limitation of Milgram’s study according to Orne and Holland?
What affect does this have on the study?
Orne and Holland criticised Milgram’s original study stating that the ppts would have realised that it was faked. This is especially true because of the extra manipulation in the variations.
For example, because of the contrived nature of the variation where the experimenter was replaced by a member of the public, it’s likely that the ppt would have guess that it wasn’t real.
This makes it difficult to tell whether the whether the results were due to the operation of obedience or because the ppts saw through the deception and acted accordingly.
What is a strength of Milgram’s variations with regards to repliaction?
the results have been replicated across different cultures. Findings of cross-cultural research have supported Milgram.
For example, Miranda et al. (1981) found obedience rates of over 90% amongst Spanish students, suggesting that Milgram’s conclusions aren’t limited to American males but are valid across cultures and apply to females too.
what is a counterargument for the point that cross-cultural replications support Milgram?
Smith and Bond (1998) pointed out that the variations took place in Western, developed societies such as Spain and Australia. These are culturally not that different from USA, so it would be premature to conclude that Milgram’s findings about proximity, location and uniform apply to people everywhere.
