SI: factors affecting obedience

Question 1

Why did Milgram carry out variations of his original study?

Answer 1

to consider situational variable that may create lesser or greater obedience

Question 2

Milgrams variations

Answer 2

Proximity of authority
Proximity of victim
Location
Uniform

Question 3

Milgram original study: participants

Answer 3

40 males
learner = confederate
teacher = true pp
experiment = confederate

Question 4

Milgram: level of voltages

Answer 4

15v
300v
450v

Question 5

15V

Answer 5

slight shock

Question 6

300V

Answer 6

intense. learner pounded on wall

no response to next Q

Question 7

450V

Answer 7

danger. severe shock

Question 8

Milgram: procedure

Answer 8

learner strapped in chair wired w/ electrodes
increase severe electric shocks
administered by teacher

Question 9

Milgram: what happened every time a mistake was made by learner

Answer 9

electric shock given

Question 10

Milgram: what happened when teacher had uncertainty

Answer 10

prods were used

Question 11

Milgram: results

Answer 11

0pp’s stopped below 300v
12.5% stopped at 300v
65% continued to 450v

Question 12

Milgram: What didi qualitative data show?

Answer 12

PP’s showed signs of extreme tension

Question 13

Milgram A03

Answer 13

lacks internal validity - aware shocks fake
not testing obedience - holland
AGAINST THIS - Sheridan and King obedience is genuine

Question 14

Milgram A03 Sheridan and king

Answer 14

100% of females administered ‘fatal shock’ to puppy

so obedience might be genuine

Question 15

uniform - original

Answer 15

original: experiment wore grey lab coat (symbol of authority)

Question 16

uniform - variation

Answer 16

experiment called away and taken over by ‘member of public’ in normal clothes

Question 17

uniform - affect on obedience

Answer 17

fell from 65% to 20%

Question 18

location - original

Answer 18

prestigious Yale university

Question 19

location - variation

Answer 19

run down office building, experimenter had less authority

Question 20

location - affect on obedience

Answer 20

fell form 65% to 47.5%

Question 21

proximity of authority - original

Answer 21

in the same room

Question 22

proximity of authority - variation

Answer 22

gave orders over the phone

Question 23

proximity of authority - findings

Answer 23

fells from 65% to 20.5%

Question 24

proximity of victim

Answer 24

teacher and learning in same room

teacher forcing learners hand onto ‘shock plate’

Question 25

proximity of victim - findings

Answer 25

teacher + learner same room = 65% to 40%

forcing learners hand = 65% to 30%

Question 26

obedience fell from 65% to 47.5% in

Answer 26

change of location

Question 27

obedience fell from 65% to 20.5% in

Answer 27

proximity of authority

Question 28

obedience fell from 65% to 20%

Answer 28

uniform

Question 29

obedience fell form 65% to 30% when

Answer 29

forcing learners hand onto shock plate

Question 30

obedience fell from 65% to 40% when

Answer 30

teacher + learner same room

Question 31

L
S
H
A
U

Answer 31

47.5%
40%
30%
20.5%
20%

Question 32

Milgram A03

Answer 32

ethical issues
deception
ability to withdraw hampered by prods