P1 Social Influence: Topic 5: Milgram's Situational Variables Flashcards
What were the 5 different variations of Milgram’s study?
- Teacher and learner in same room (Proximity).
- Teacher had to force learners hand onto shock panel (Touch proximity).
- Experimenter giving info & instructions via telephone rather than being in same room (Proximity).
- Venue moved to seedy, run-down offices (Location).
- Experimenter ‘called away’ due to ‘inconvenient telephone call’ at beginning. Role of experimenter taken over by a ‘member of the public’ (confederate) who wasn’t wearing uniform/lab coat, but everyday clothes (Uniform).
What were findings of Milgram’s variation when:
Teacher and learner in same room.
- 40% went up to 450V.
- This is because of the increased consequences of actions as the participant could see pain in learner.
What were findings of Milgram’s variation when:
Teacher had to force learners hand onto shock panel.
- 30% went up to 450V.
- This is because the teacher was directly responsible.
What were findings of Milgram’s variation when:
Experimenter giving info & instructions via telephone rather than being in same room.
- 20.5% went up to 450V.
- This is because the telephone reduces the power of an authoritive figure.
What were findings of Milgram’s variation when:
Venue moved to seedy, run-down offices.
- 47.5% went up to 450V.
- This is because the lack of legitimacy reduced the belief in the ‘scientific’ nature of the study.
What were findings of Milgram’s variation when:
Experimenter ‘called away’ due to ‘inconvenient telephone call’ at beginning. Role of experimenter taken over by a ‘member of the public’ (confederate) who wasn’t wearing uniform/lab coat, but everyday clothes.
- 20% went up to 450V.
- This is because the loss of the lab coat means the authority of the experimenter is removed.
- So the experimenter has less rights to expect obedience
What study did Bickman do in 1974?
Field experiment. Research for uniform as a situational variable.
- 3 confederates dress up in different outfits - a jacket & tie, a milkman’s outfit, and a security guard’s uniform.
- They stood in street and asked passers-by to perform tasks such as picking up litter or giving them a coin for the parking meter.
What were the findings of Bickman’s study?
- People were 2x as likely to obey the person dressed as a security guard than a jacket & tie.
- This supports Milgram’s variation of putting in a ‘member of the public’ as the experimenter.
What study did Meeus and Raaijmakers do in 1986?
A cross-cultural replication which supports Milgram’s work.
- Dutch participants told to say stressful and unkind remarks to an interviewee who was desperate for a job.
What were the findings of Meeus and Raaijmakers study?
- 90% of participants obeyed the instruction.
- Cross cultural to show that the study doesn’t only apply to one culture and is reproducible.
- High external validity.
What cultures are the majority of cross cultural replications done from? What did Smith and Bond find?
- Nearly all replications done from Western and European cultures (US, Australia and Spain).
- Smith and Bond found there were only 2 replications done in ‘non Western’ cultures (Jordan & India) - low internal validity.
What was Orne and Holland’s criticims of Milgram’s study?
A lack of internal validity.
- Participants worked out procedure was faked.
- This is even more so in the situational variables, e.g., experimenter got a phone call and was replaced by a ‘member of the public’.
- Milgram accepted situation was very contrived and easy to guess the truth.
What does Mandel argue in 1998?
The situational variables could be seen as offensive.
- The situational variables can give an ‘alibi’ or act as a excuse for evil behaviour.
- It is an offense to the suriviors of the holocaust to suggest the Nazi’s were just following orders.
