Obedience: Situational variables Flashcards
What were the situational variables Milgram considered?
- Proximity
- Location
- Uniform
What did Milgram do to test the proximity variation?
Milgram had the teacher and learner in the same room, as opposed to the original being in adjoining rooms.
In the proximity variation, did obedience rate drop or rise? To what number?
In this proximity variation, obedience rate dropped from 65% to 40%
There were two other proximity variation tests, what did they involve and what rates of obedience were achieved?
In the second proximity variation. the teacher was told to force the learner’s hand onto the electroshock plate when answer given was incorrect. This made obedience rates drop a further 30%
In the third proximity variation, the experimenter left the room and gave the teacher instructions through the phone. Obedience rate dropped further to 20.5%
What did Milgram do to test the location variation?
Milgram changed the location of the obedience study from the prestigious university to a run down building.
In the location variation, did obedience rates drop or rise? To what number?
Obedience rates dropped in the location variation to 47.5%
What did Milgram do to test the uniform variation?
Milgram carried out this variation by having the experimenter be called away by a phone call and having an “ordinary member of public” replace them. This “ordinary member of public” was a confederated dressed in everyday clothes.
In the uniform variation, did obedience rates drop or rise? To what number?
In the uniform variation, the obedience rates dropped and to 20%
What is a strength of Milgram’s research into situational variables that may affect obedience? (cross cultural research)
A strength of Milgram’s research is that his findings have been replicated in other cultures. The findings of cross cultural research have been generally supportive of Milgram. For example, Miranda et al found an obedience rate of over 90% amongst Spanish students. This suggests that Milgram’s conclusions about obedience are not limited to american males, but are valid across cultures and females too
What is a strength of Milgram’s research into situational variables that may affect obedience? (supporting evidence - new york)
Other studies have demonstrated the influence of these situational variables on obedience. In a field experiment in New York City, a psychologist had three confederates in three different outfits - jacket and tie, a milkman’s outfit and a security guard’s outfit. The confederates stood in the street and asked passer - by to perform tasks, like picking up the trash. People were twice as likely to obey the assistant dresses 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 variable likely to produce or reduce obedience
What is a limitation of Milgram’s research into situational variables that may affect obedience? (fake settings + manipulated)
Orne and Holland’s criticism of Milgram’s study was participants may have worked out that the procedure was faked. It could be argued due to the further manipulation in Milgram’s variations, this could have occurred. Even Milgram recognised the ‘uniform’ variation was extremely contrived that some participants may have worked out the truth. This is a imitation because it becomes unclear whether results collected are genuinely due to the operation of obedience or participants seeing through deception and acting accordingly
What is a limitation of Milgram’s research into situational variables that may affect obedience? (situational explanation of obedience)
Milgram’s findings from his variations support a situational explanation of obedience. The proximity of experimenter, teacher and learner, the location of the study and the presence of a uniform are all factors within the situation that influence obedience. This perspective has been criticised by Mandel who argues that it offers an excuse or ‘alibi’ for evil behaviour. In his view, it is offensive to survivors of the Holocaust, for example, to suggest that the Nazis were simply obeying orders and were victims themselves of situational factors beyond their control
