Situational Variables affecting obedience

Question 1

Proximity - How close the ppts were to the confederate or experimenter

Answer 1

Teacher and learner in the same room , obedience fell to 40%.
When teacher was required to force the learner onto the electric shock plate (touch proximity) Obedience dropped to 30%.
The experimenter left the room and gave instructions by phone (remote instruction). Obedience dropped to 20.5%.

Question 2

Location - change of location

Answer 2

Change the location from Yale university to a run down office. Obedience fell to 48%.
The amount of perceived legitimate authority of the experimenter was reduced.

Question 3

Power of uniforms

Answer 3

The role of the experimenter was taken over by a ordinary member of the public who wore everyday clothes. Obedience dropped to 20%.

Question 4

RTS Bickman

Answer 4

Had confederate dress in 3 different outfits ( a security guard ,milkman and business man) and ask passers to give money for parking or to pick up litter.
PPTS were twice as likely to follow instruction from the security guard than the business man.
Supporting as it demonstrates this variable affects obedience in a real life setting.

Question 5

One weakness gender bias

Answer 5

Male sample was used meaning it is difficult to generalise the findings to females as they may have obeyed differently because their gender role may dictate to be more submissive.
Weakens external validity.

Question 6

An Alt explanation is dispositional factors (internal factor)
Authoritarian Personality

Answer 6

This would argue that obedience is due to internal characteristics of the person. their personality rather than situational factors.
This weakens the research as it is not the sole explanation.