Social Influence L6

Question 1

Obedience definition

Answer 1

A form of social influence in which an individual follows a direction/order. The person issuing the order is usually a figure of authority, who has the power to punish

Question 2

Who carried out a study to investigate obedience?

Answer 2

Milgram (1963)

Question 3

What was the aim of Milgram’s (1963) study?

Answer 3

• To investigate the levels of obedience participants would show when an authority figure tells them to administer electric shocks to another human being
• To prove that the Holocaust was due to the dispositional factors (personality factors) of the soldiers

Question 4

What was the method of Milgram’s (1963) study?

Answer 4

• He advertised for male participants to take part in the study at Yale University — this is known as a volunteer sampling method
• 40 male participants took part in the study, all of which were NOT students (age 20-50)
• They were paid $4 per hour and were told that the study was based on memory and learning
• Each participant was paired with a confederate and drew lots to decide who would be the ‘learner’ and who would be the ‘teacher’
• The draw was fixed so that the participant was always the ‘teacher’, and the ‘learner’ was the confederate
• The learner (known as Mr Wallace) was taken into a room where he had electrodes attached to his arm
• When asked if he had any medical conditions, he stated that he had a minor heart condition
• The teacher and researcher went into a room next door that contained an electric shock generator and a row of switches marked from 15 volts (slight shock) to 450 volts (death)
• The shock generator was not real, however the participant did not know this
• The participant had to read out pairs of words that the learner had to remember
• If they got one wrong or said nothing, then the participant had to give them an electric shock and increase the voltage each time
• If the participant asked advice from the experimenter or indicated that he did not want to continue, he would be given encouragement with a sequence of standardised ‘prods’ (4 in total)
• If the participant continued to disobey after prod 4, the experiment was terminated

Question 5

What were the results of Milgram’s (1963) study?

Answer 5

• He predicted before the study that 2% of people would shock to the highest level, but most people would quit early on
• However, it was found that all participants shocked up to 300 volts, and 65% of participants shocked all the way up to 450 volts (the maximum)
• A total of 14 participants defied the experimenter, and 26 obeyed
• Many participants showed signs of nervousness and tension as many sweated, trembled, stuttered, etc.
• A common sign of tension was nervous laughing fits (14 out of 40 participants)
• 3 participants had uncontrollable seizures
• 1 participant had such a violent seizure that the experiment had to be halted
• All participants were debriefed at the end of the study and assured that their behaviour was entirely normal
• They were sent a follow-up questionnaire where 84% reported that they felt glad to have participated

Question 6

What was the conclusion of Milgram’s (1963) study?

Answer 6

Normal ordinary people will obey authority even if their actions may be detrimental

Question 7

What are the 2 strengths of Milgram’s (1963) study?

Answer 7

1. Good external validity
2. It has supporting replication

Question 8

What are the 2 weaknesses of Milgram’s (1963) study?

Answer 8

1. Low internal validity
2. Ethical issues.

Question 9

Describe the evaluation of Milgram’s (1963) study that it has ‘good external validity’

Answer 9

• Although it appears to lack external validity at first because it was carried out in a lab, it still shows the relationship between the authority figure (experimenter) and the participant
• He argued that the lab environment accurately reflected real life authority
• His research is supported by Hofling et al’s (1966) Obedient Nurses study
• In Hofling et al’s (1966) study, 22 nurses working at various American hospitals received phone calls from a confederate “Dr Smith”, instructing them to give Mr Jones (Dr Smith’s patient) 20mg of a made up drug called Astrofen
• Dr Smith said he was in a hurry and would sign the drug authorisation form when he came to see the patient in 10 mins
• The label on the box containing the Astrofen clearly stated that the maximum dose was 10mg
• 21 out of the 22 nurses that received the phone call complied without hesitation and 11 later said that they had noticed the dosage discrepancy
• They were willing to exceed the maximum dose of the drug, even though they didn’t know for sure if Dr Smith was a genuine doctor as they only spoke over the phone

Question 10

Describe the evaluation of Milgram’s (1963) study that it has ‘supporting replication’

Answer 10

• Le Jeu De La Mort (The Game of Death) (2010) is a documentary which replicates the Milgram study
• The participants were paid to give (fake) electric shocks to other participants (who were actors) when ordered by the presenter
• 80% of participants delivered the maximum shock of 460 volts to an apparently unconscious man
• Their behaviour was identical to Milgram’s participants (nervous laughter, nail biting, signs of anxiety etc)
• This replication supports Milgram’s conclusions about obedience to authority

Question 11

Describe the evaluation of Milgram’s (1963) study that it has ‘low internal validity’

Answer 11

• Internal validity refers to whether the procedure used in the experiment is measuring what it is supposed to measure
• Orne and Holland (1968) argued that participants behaved the way they did because they guessed that they were giving fake electric shocks to the ‘learner’, so it is not measuring what it is supposed to measure as the participants would be showing demand characteristics
• Perry’s (2013) research confirms this as she listened to tapes of Milgram’s participants, and many of them expressed doubts on whether the shock was real or not

Question 12

Describe the evaluation of Milgram’s (1963) study that it has ‘ethical issues’

Answer 12

• Baumrind (1964) was critical of the way Milgram showed deception towards his participants as he made them believe that the roles of teacher and learner were randomly allocated, however the participant was actually always the teacher
• He also deceived his participants by making them think that the electric shocks were real
• CRITICISM: Participants were not fully informed about the nature of the study so they weren’t able to give their full consent
• DEFENCE: The experiment required that the participants weren’t aware of the true nature of the study, and therefore deception was necessary. Participants were also debriefed afterwards and told the true aim of the experiment
• CRITICISM: It was made difficult to withdraw from as participants were encouraged to continue when they wanted to stop
• DEFENCE: Withdrawal was difficult but not impossible as participants were not physically forced to continue and 35% did withdraw
• CRITICISM: Risk of long term harm as participants were put in a stressful situation where they were led to believe they had injured and possibly even killed another person
• DEFENCE: Participants were debriefed and told that the shocks were not real afterwards

Question 13

Internal validity definition

Answer 13

It refers to whether the procedure used in the experiment is measuring what it is supposed to measure