Social Influence L7 Flashcards
What are the 3 situational variables affecting obedience?
- Proximity
- Location
- Uniform
Proximity definition
It refers to how physically close the teacher and learner are, and the teacher and experimenter are. In other words, how physically close the authority figure is to the participant.
How did Milgram investigate proximity as a situational variable affecting obedience?
- In his original study, the teacher and learner were in an adjoining room, so the teacher could hear the learner but not see him
- In the proximity variation, they were in the same room
- This caused obedience rates to drop from 65% to 40%
How did Milgram investigate location as a situational variable affecting obedience?
- In another variation, Milgram changed the location of the study
- He conducted it in a run-down building rather than the prestigious Yale University
- Obedience levels fell to 47.5%
- This is still a high level of obedience, but less than the original 65% in the baseline study
How did Milgram investigate uniform as a situational variable affecting obedience?
- In the original study, the experimenter wore a grey lab coat as a symbol of his authority (like a uniform)
- In another variation, the experimenter was called away because of a phone call at the start of the procedure
- The role of the experimenter was taken over by an ‘ordinary member of the public’ (a confederate) in everyday clothes rather than a lab coat
- Obedience rates dropped to 20%, the lowest of all 3 variations
What are the 3 strengths of Milgram’s variations surrounding situational variables?
- Research support
- Cross cultural replications
- Control of variables in Milgram’s variations
What are the 2 weaknesses of Milgram’s variations surrounding situational variables?
- Lack of internal validity
- The obedience alibi
Describe the evaluation of Milgram’s study that it has ‘research support’
- Bickman’s (1974) The Power of Uniforms study supports uniform as a situational variable
- 3 researchers gave orders to 153 randomly selected pedestrians in New York
- The researchers were dressed in one of 3 ways: in a suit, a milkman’s uniform, or a guard’s uniform
- They gave various orders, such as ‘pick up this bag please’, and found that participants were most likely to obey the researcher dressed as a guard (80%) compared to the milkman or civilian (40%)
- This supports Milgram’s conclusion that uniform conveys that authority of its wearer and is a situational factor that can produce obedience
Describe the evaluation of Milgram’s study that it has ‘cross cultural replications’
- His research and variations have been replicated in other cultures as well
- Miranda et al (1981) found high obedience rates in Spanish students (90%), suggesting that Milgram’s conclusions about obedience are not limited to American males
- His conclusions can apply to females and other cultures too
- However, Smith and Bond (1998) argued that Milgram’s study was replicated in developed societies which are similar to the US, such as Australia and Spain
- This means that the findings cannot be applied across all countries as developing countries will have different norms compared to developed countries
- Therefore, Milgram’s findings about proximity and location may not be applied across the world
Describe the evaluation of Milgram’s study that it has ‘control of variables in Milgram’s variations’
- This applied especially for proximity and location where these variables were highly controlled as Milgram only altered that one specific variable but kept the rest of the variables constant
- He replicated these variations on 1000 participants in total, suggesting that his research is not only valid but also replicable (it can be repeated)
- Therefore, stronger conclusions can be drawn about situational variables and obedience
Describe the evaluation of Milgram’s study that it has a ‘lack of internal validity’
- Orne and Holland argued that the participants in Milgram’s original study had guessed that the procedure was a set up and therefore fake — they could have realised this through the 4 prompts
- In the variations of Milgram’s research, when the experimenter is replaced by a member of public, obedience rates went down to 20%
- This is because the participants may have worked out that it was fake, hence why 35% did not shock to the full 450 volts
- Therefore we do not know if real obedience to authority occurred or if it was just demand characteristics
Describe the evaluation of Milgram’s study that refers to ‘the obedience alibi’
David Mandel (1998) argued that using these situational variables (proximity, location, and uniform) almost makes them an excuse or ‘alibi’ for evil or bad behaviour
