Situational variables in obedience

Question 1

milgram’s study

Answer 1

Milgram conducted several variations of his original study
= wanted to determine which situational variables lead to high levels of obedience + which reduces obedience

Question 2

situational variables affecting obedience

Answer 2

• proximity
• location
• uniform

Question 3

proximity

Answer 3

proximity variation:
- both the teacher + the learner were now seated in the same room
= obedience levels fell to 40%
= teacher was now able to experience Mr Wallace’s pain directly

touch proximity variation:
- more extreme, teacher had to actually force the learner’s arm down onto a metal plate to administer the shocks
= obedience levels = 30%

absent experimenter variation:
- experimenter left the room after giving the instructions
- gave subsequent orders by telephone
- vast majority of parts either missed out shocks or gave lower voltages than they were meant to
= obedience rate = 21%

Question 4

location

Answer 4

alternative setting variation:
- experiment was carried out in a rundown office in Connecticut
- experimenter was wearing casual clothes
- all other variations were carried out in Yale University
= obedience rate = 48%
= lower status of rundown office changed parts’ perception of the legitimacy of the authority of the experimenter
= lower authority compared to at Yale uni

Question 5

uniform

Answer 5

• visible symbols of authority, power + status
  e.g. police vs prisoner
• psych conducted a study where they asked confederates to order passersby to pick some litter off the street or move away from a bus stop
• confederates were dressed as either a guard, milkman or in smart clothes
  = 90% of people obeyed the guard
  = only 50% obeyed the civilian
  = a person in a guard uniform is more likely to be obeyed
  = if the experimenter is wearing a lab coat, more likely to be obeyed than in casual clothes (Milgram’s study)