Research Into Obedience And Situational Variables Affecting Obedience

Question 1

Define obedience to authority

Answer 1

• where someboy acts in response to a direct order from a figure with perceived authority

Question 2

Milgram’s study

Answer 2

Procedure:
- sample: 40 american males aged 20-50
- ppts told it was a study on memory and learning
- ppts assigned role of teacher in rigged draw (learner was always confed)
- told to administer ‘electric shocks’ when learner got a question
- used prompts if teacher refused: ‘please continue’ ‘you have no other choice, you must go on’

Findings:
- 100% went to 300 volts and 65% obeyed and gave max voltage of 450 volts

Conclusion:
- shows that ordinary people are obedient and capable of acting in an inhumane way

Question 3

Milgram’s study: weakness 1

Answer 3

P- gender bias
E- only used male ppts
E- difficult to generalise findings to females as some psychologist suggest they may have higher levels of obedience and would obey more
L- thus, limiting the external validity of research

Question 4

Milgram’s study: weakness 2

Answer 4

P- unethical
E- lack of protection from harm
E- due to distress of obeying and giving what they believed to be electric shocks, also used deception as ppts were told it was a study on memory and learning
L- limiting researching into obedience

Question 5

Situational variable 1: proximity

Answer 5

-when authority figure is closer to the ppts, obedience increases
- when experimenter was in the room in Milgram’s study, obedience was 65% when orders were given over the phone obedience dropped to 20%
- when ppt is closer to the victim obedience decreases

Question 6

Situational variable 2: location

Answer 6

-when the location was changed from Yale university (prestigious setting) to a run down office in a run down part of town obedience dropped from 65% to 48%
- the more prestigious the location where the order is given the more likely a person will obey

Question 7

Situational variable 3- Uniform

Answer 7

-if an authority figure is wearing a uniform it is more likely a person will obey their orders
- when the experimenter wore a white lab coat obedience was 65%, this reduced to 20% when the authority figure was replaced by an ‘ordinary member of public wearing everyday clothes’

Question 8

R2S: situational variables

Answer 8

P-field experiment conducted by Bickman
E- he had confeds dress in 3 diffferent outfits ( security guard, milkman, and a business man) and ask passer-bys to pay for parking or pick up litter
E- when a person giving the order was dressed in security guard uniform the ppt were more likely to obey than if they were wearing shirt and tie
L-supporting the power of uniform as a variable affecting obedience as ppts more likely to follow these orders, as eell as demonstrating this variable affects obedience in a real-life setting

Question 9

Weakness 1- situational variables

Answer 9

P- gender bias
E- male only sample used
E- difficult to generalise findings to females as they may have obeyed differently to situational factors of obedience, for example, some research suggests females may be more obedient regardless of the situational variable because their gender role may dictate that they be more submissive.
L- weakens external validity of research as variables may affect obedience in some people more than others

Question 10

Weakness 2- situational variables

Answer 10

P- alternative explanation for obedience- dispositional factors
E- e.g the authoritarian personality
E- this would argue that obedience is due to internal characteristics of the person e.g. their personality, rather than situational factors. Therefore, this suggests that obedience may not just be due to proximity , location, and uniform.
L- weakens research as it is not the sole explanation