Obedience: situational variables

Question 1

Obedience: situational variables

list

Answer 1

Proximity
Location
Uniform

Question 2

Obedience: situational variables

Proximity

Answer 2

└Different rooms: 65%
└Same rooms (proximity): 40%
└Teacher forces learners hand on plate (touch proximity): 30%
└experimenter gave orders by phone (remote instruction): 20.5%

Question 3

Obedience: situational variables

Location

Answer 3

└Yale: 65%

└run-down office: 47.5%

Question 4

Obedience: situational variables

Uniform

Answer 4

└grey lab coat (uniform): 65%

└experimenter played by member of public in everyday clothes: 20% (lowest)

Question 5

Obedience: situational variables
Strengths
Summary

Answer 5

Research support- Brickman (1974)

Control of variables in variation- Milgram

Cross cultural replications- Miranda et al (1981), smith and bond (1998)

Question 6

Obedience: situational variables
Strengths
Research support

Answer 6

└Brickman (1974)
└ field experiment in NYC
└3 confederates dressed in different outfits
└jacket and tie, milkmans outfit, security guards uniform
└they stood in the street and asked people to perform tasks such as picking up litter
└people twice as likely to obey security guard than jacket and tie
└supports milgrams conclusion that uniform conveys authority and is a situational factor likely to produce obedience

Question 7

Obedience: situational variables
Strengths
Control of variables in variation

Answer 7

└Milgram systematically altered one variable at a time (e.g. proximity) to see its effect on obedience
└all other procedures and variables were kept the same as the study was replicated with over 1000 total participants

Question 8

Obedience: situational variables
Strengths
Cross cultural replications

Answer 8

└his findings have been replicated in other cultures, cross-cultural research generally supportive of milgram
└Miranda et al (1981)
└obedience rate of over 90% amongst Spanish students
└suggests milgrams conclusions about obedience are not limited to American males but can be generalised across cultures and to females
└HOWEVER smith and bond (1998)
└most replications in western developed countries (spain, Australia)
└culturally not different from USA

Question 9

Obedience: situational variables
Limitations
Summary

Answer 9

Lack of internal validity - Orne and Holland

Obedience alibi- David Mandel (1998)

Question 10

Obedience: situational variables
Limitations
Lack of internal validity

Answer 10

└Orne and Holland
└criticised original; study as many participants worked out it was fake
└said it was even more likely because of extra manipulation
└e.g. when member of pubic had to take over- even milgram recognised the situation was so contrived some participants may have worked out the truth
└unclear if results were genuinely due to obedience or if participants saw through the deception and acted accordingly

Question 11

Obedience: situational variables
Limitations
Obedience alibi

Answer 11

└David Mandel (1998)
└criticised this perspective as it offers an excuse/alibi for evil behaviour
└offensive of holocaust survivors to suggest Nazis were simply obeying orders and were victims themselves of situational factors beyond their control