Obedience: Situational Variables

Question 1

define obedience

2

Answer 1

a type of social influence where someone acts in response to a direct order from a figure with perceived authority

the person probably would not have responded or behaved in that way without the order

Question 2

outline a study into obedience

7

Answer 2

Milgram (1963) conducted a study into obedience

• 40 participants — who were told the study was about how punishment affects learning
• 2 experimental confederates; the experimenter + a 47 year old man who was introduced as another volunteer participant
• the participants drew lots to decide who would be the teacher and who would be the learner — this was rigged so the real participant was always the teacher
• teacher had to test the learner on their ability to remember word pairs
• for every incorrect answer, the teacher had to administer increasingly strong electric shocks starting at 15 volts and continuing up to 450 volts
• the learner faked his responses, at 300 volts he pounded on the wall and then gave no response to later questions
• if the teacher asked to stop, the experimenter had a series of prods to repeat such as saying “you have no other choice, you must go on”

Question 3

outline the findings of a study into obedience

5

Answer 3

it was initially predicted that very few people would go beyond 150 volts and only 1 in 1000 would administer the full 450 volts

however, 65% of participants continued to the maximum shock level (obedience rate)

all participants reached 300 volts

only 12.5% stopped at 300 volts (when the learner objected), the rest continued

some participants were sweating, trembling, etc and 3 had seizures

Question 4

define situational factors (+ which ones were tested by Milgram?)

2

Answer 4

factors about the environment that affect obedience

Milgram tested 3 situational factors affecting obedience in his variations — location, uniform and proximity

Question 5

how does location affect obedience?

3

Answer 5

the original study was carried out at Yale University, the study was then moved to a rundown office block

obedience rates dropped slightly from 65% to 48%

this was because the office was a less formal and less prestigious environment which was not very legitimate — it led people to question the experiment more and therefore made them less likely to obey

Question 6

how does uniform affect obedience?

4

Answer 6

had the most impact on obedience

obedience fell significantly from 65% to 20% when the experimenter wore casual clothes instead of a lab coat

uniforms convey power and authority, increasing the legitimacy of the experimenter

so without a uniform, the experimenter was less trustworthy and respectable, making people less likely to obey

Question 7

types of proximity tested by Milgram in his variations

1

Answer 7

Milgram tested 3 types of promixity in his variations — proximity, touch proximity + experimenter proximity

Question 8

how does proximity affect obedience?

3

Answer 8

teacher and learner were seated in the same room rather than being separated by a screen, which had previously acted as a buffer

obedience felt to 40%

this was because the teacher was able to see the consequences of their actions and that they were causing harm to someone else

Question 9

how did the touch proximity variation affect obedience?

3

Answer 9

the teacher had to force the learners hand onto the shock plate

obedience fell to 30%

this was because the teacher was now physically forcing harm onto someone else rather than indirectly causing harm by flicking a switch, they were much more responsible for the person’s pain

Question 10

how does experimenter proximity affect obedience?

4

Answer 10

the experimenter left the room and issued instructions over the telephone

majority of participants now defied the experimenter — obedience fell to 21%

this was because the pressure of the authority figure was taken away which made it easier to ignore the experimenter

some even gave the weakest shock level over and over despite telling the experimenter that they were following the correct procedure

Question 11

what is the difference between obedience and conformity?

3

Answer 11

direct order to obey, no direct order to conform

for obedience there must be someone of perceived authority, in conformity everyone is of equal status

people are more likely to acknowledge their obedience, less likely to acknowledge their conformity

Question 12

x3 evaluation points for Milgram

Answer 12

unethical

historical validity

lack of realism

Question 13

EVALUATION
unethical

7

Answer 13

Milgram’s study is criticised by other psychologists such as Baumrind for being unethical

Milgram displayed an apparent lack of concern for the wellbeing of his participants — he did not adequately protect them from harm, for example 3 had seizures and many showed obvious signs of distress such as sweating and trembling

there was also confusion of the right to withdraw as they were clearly pressured to stay through the experimenters prods

he also deceived them by not telling them the true purpose of the study, making it impossible for the participants to give fully informed consent

HOWEVER…. Milgram argued that a full debrief was given after the study which included a one year follow up with a psychiatrist who found no evidence of harm

in fact, 84% said they were glad to have taken part in the study

participants were also told they had the right to withdraw, they were free to leave at any time and were not in restraints

Question 14

EVALUATION
historical validity

3

Answer 14

although his study was conducted over 50 years ago, this does not necessarily mean that it lacks historical validity

for example, a study by Burger (2009) found levels of obedience almost identical to those found by Milgram 46 years earlier

suggests Milgram’s findings still apply as much today as they did back in the early 1960s

Question 15

EVALUATION
lack of realism

5

Answer 15

experimenter remained cool and distant despite the learner crying out in pain

this is not a realistic response at all and could’ve led the participant to guess that the learner was not suffering any real harm

Perry (2012) discovered that many of Milgram’s participants were sceptical about whether the shocks were real

HOWEVER, Milgram ensured a real sample shock was given to the teacher before the experiment which would’ve convinced them that the shock generator was real

furthermore, people were clearly stressed which suggests they truly believed they were causing harm to another person

Question 16

EXTRA EVALUATION
support for power of uniform

6

Answer 16

Bickman (1974)

• used 3 male actors dressed as a milkman, security guard or in normal clothes
• actors asked passers to do tasks such as pick up a paper bag
• people were more likely to obey the security guard and least likely to obey the normal clothed actor
• 80% obeyed the security guard and only 40% obeyed the man in normal clothes (no uniform)
• supports the idea that uniforms have a powerful influence on obedience
• they convey a sense of power and authority that makes a person more likely to be respected and obeyed