Situational Factors On Why Participants Obey

Question 1

Situational factors

• Foot in the door
  (small increases)

Answer 1

• This involves giving smaller orders to obey and increasing them slowly into a bigger amount/ severity so participants are more likely to obey
• as small increases means the action is not perceived as bad as if the action was that severe to begin with

MILGRAM E.G.

• increasing the shock voltage from 15V by 15V to each incorrect answer to 450V
• this is rather than immediately getting the participant to shock for learner by 450 volts which may cause them t o reconsider their actions

Question 2

Situational factors

• Buffers

no see impact

Answer 2

• Anything that makes it so the participant cannot directly see the impact/ consequence of their actions

MILGRAM E.G.

• the wall between the learner’s room and the generator room so the teacher cannot see the learner

Question 3

Situational factors

• Prompts
  (so they feel there is no other option)

Answer 3

• giving a direct and clear instruction to the participants
• if this instruction is formal it’s increases depressure to obey
• makes participants feel there is no other option

MILGRAM E.G.

• when the participants refuses to continue milgram says four prompts:
• ” please continue, please go on”
• ” it is absolutely essential that you continue”
• ” the experiment requires that you continue”
• ” you have no other choice, you must go on”

Question 4

Situational factors

• Demand Characteristics

Social norms consistant (fitting) with social setting and vice versa so more legit and beleivable

Answer 4

• when the social setting presented itself with the required social norms
• Social norms consistant (fitting) with social setting and vice versa so more legit and beleivable so ^ obey

MILGRAM E.G.

• the lab coat fitting with Yale University

Question 5

Situational factors

• Gradual Commitment

do last one why not this? small increase

Answer 5

• if the participant obeyed the Last Action then why wouldn’t they obey the next action
• they comply if the action doesn’t seem as bad as The Last Action
• this works well with foot and the door as increasing little by little the severity of the order means that they feel that the new order that is only slightly more to there isn’t as bad as the one before it and therefore I’m more likely to not question it and obey

MILGRAM E.G

• the small increase of 15 volts each time the learner gets a question incorrect

Question 6

Situational factors

• prestigious setting

Answer 6

• Give the experiment to legitimate authority and the experiment itself legitimacy as the setting the takes place is perceived as legitimate and therefore participants are more likely to obey

MILGRAM E.G.

• milligrams 1963 study takes place at the Prestigious Yale University

Question 7

Situational factors

• diffusion of responsibility

(not ppt responsability so obey)

Answer 7

– follow orders if they believe the authority figure that is in charge takes the responsibility of their actions

• meaning the participants perceive it as not being there fault and the more likely to comply with the orders as they will not be held responsible if it goes wrong

MILGRAM E.G.

• during MG 1963 study the experimenter said when asked by the ppts that they would take responsibility for what happens to the learner
• this meant the participants were more likely to obey as they would not be responsible for the actions

Question 8

Situational factors

• perception of legitimate authority

i.e clothes setting etc

Answer 8

• if if the participant believes that the experimenter is a legitimate authority they’re more likely to obey
• this can be done in different ways for example by giving the experimenter a uniform or a prestigious setting

MILGRAM E.G.

• to increase the perceived legitimate authority of the experiments it took place at the Prestigious Yale University and the experimental were a lab coat indicating that they were professionals and legitimate increasing the likelihood of participants obeying

Question 9

Situational factors

• seen as a fair experiment

Answer 9

• when a situation is seen as fair and the participant could have equally been given the other participants role
• they believed that the other participant in their position would do the same as they would and therefore feel less guilt when complying with the experimenter

MILGRAM E.G.

• both the Confederate learner and the participant Drew paper out of a box
• this was rigged so that’s the participant always got the role of teacher and the learner lied and said that they got learner
• in reality all of the paper in the box said teacher
• due to the participant feeling that they could have equally got learner they feel that the learner would have done the same in their position and feels less guilt when complying with the experimenters actions