Social: Contemporary Study - Burger (2009)

Question 1

What was the 1st aim?

Answer 1

Would M’s findings be replicated nearly 50yrs later.

Question 2

What was the 2nd aim?

Answer 2

See whether people use the behaviour of others as a norm reference for how to behave (obedience).

Question 3

What was the 3rd aim?

Answer 3

Gender differences in obedience?

Question 4

What was the 4th aim?

Answer 4

Personality differences in obedience?

Question 5

Sample?

Answer 5

70 P’s (M and F), between the ages of 20-81.

Question 6

How was the sample recruited?

Answer 6

Volunteer sample: recruited through newspapers, online ads and fliers in libraries. Then randomly split into 2 conditions (model refusal and base)

Question 7

How much were they paid?

Answer 7

$50

Question 8

Who did he screen out?

Answer 8

• 2+ Psych lessons.
• Heard Milgram’s experiment.
• Anxiety issues or drug dependency.

Question 9

What voltage was the sample shock?

Answer 9

15v

Question 10

What was the max voltage of the shock generator?

Answer 10

150v

Question 11

Baseline procedure?

Answer 11

• Watched confederate get strapped into e-chair then sat in shock-gen room.
• Teacher read out 25 multiple choice q’s, answer wrong is a shock starting at 15v and increased in 15v increments.
• Learner indicated “slight heart condition” cond, but experimenter says shocks aren’t harmful.
• 75v learner makes sounds of pain.
• 150v learner cries that he wants to stop and complains about chest pains.
• If teacher tries to deliver 165v shock, experimenter stops.

Question 12

Model refusal procedure?

Answer 12

Same procedure as base, but:

• 2 confeds used: 1 learner and 1 teacher (same gender as real P).
• Confed teacher hesitated at 75v.
• 90v said ‘I don’t know about this’ so experimenter focused on real P to deliver remaining shocks.

Question 13

Ethical controls?

Answer 13

• 2 step screening process.
• P’s warned 3 times they could withdraw and keep money.
• Experimenter was psychologist who could spot and react to distress.
• Test shock 15v not 45v.
• Didn’t let time pass before re-introducing learner and debrief.

Question 14

Results?

Answer 14

Contuning past 150v:

• Baseline = 70%
• Model refusal = 63.3%
• M variation 5 = 82.5%

Question 15

Conclusions?

Answer 15

1. M’s results stand 50 years later.
2. No less obed after seeing another person refuse to continue than base (might show situational factors leading them to continue).
3. No gender differences may reflect situational factors overriding individual differences. Or, F concern for others < ability to stand up to experimenter (compared to M).