social influence milgram's experiment (evaluation) Flashcards
what does it mean when we say Milgram’s experiment had low validity
Orne and Holland (1968) said participants behaved the way they did because they didn’t believe in the set up -they didn’t believe it was real electric shocks
Gina Perry (2013) recent research confirmed this. She listened to the tapes of Milgram’s participants expressed their doubt about the shocks
how did Sheridan and King (1972) disprove the points Orne and Holland made
Sheridan and King (1972) conducted a similar study where real shocks were given to a puppy
-54% male students went up to a fatal shock
-100% females delivered what they thought was fatal shock
This suggests that the effects in Milgram’s study were genuine because people behaved the same way with real shocks
Milgram reported that 70% of his participants said they believed the shocks were genuine
what does it mean when we say Milgram’s experiment had good external validity
At first glance it may lack external validity because it was conducted in a lab
However, the central feature of the situation was the relationship between the authority figure (the experimenter) and the participants
Milgram argued that the lab environment accurately reflected wider authority relationships in real life
Other researchers support this argument e.g. Hofling et al (1966) studied nurses on a hospital ward and found that levels of obedience to unjustified demand by doctors were very high (with 21 out of 22 nurses obeying). This suggests that the processes of obedience to authority that occurred in Milgram’s lab can be generalised to other situations. - his research therefore had something important to tell us about obedience operates in real life
what replication of Milgram’s experiment supports his findings on obedience
Le Jeu de la Mort ( The Game of Death) is a documentary about reality TV, presented in French television in 2010
It includes a replication of Milgram’s study. Participants believed they were constantly in a pilot episode for a new game show called La Zone Xtreme.
They were paid to give (fake) electric shock when ordered by the presenter - to other participants who were in fact actors, in front of a studio audience
-80% of participants delivered the max shock to an apparently unconscious man.
The behaviours was identical to that of Milgram’s participants. This replication demonstrates that his findings were not not just a one off chance occurrence
what is an alternative explanation to the findings of Milgram’s experiment
The key to obedience lies in group identification ( social identity)
In Milgram’s study, participants identified with the experimenter - they identified with the science of the study
When the obedience levels dropped, this was because the participants identified less with the science and more with the victim or with another group
Alex Haslam and Steve Reicher (2012) analysed the behaviour of the participants in Milgram’s study. They looked at how participants in Milgram’s study looked at how participants behaved every time one of the four prods was used:
1st three do no demand obedience - appeal for science
4th demands obedience - participants quit every time it was used
what are the ethical issues in Milgram’s experiment
Diana Baumrind (1964) was critical of how Milgram deceived participants e.g. led participants to believe roles as "teacher" and "learner" was ransom - it was fixed/rigged the electric shocks were fake
Baumrind saw deception saw a betrayal of trust that could damage the reputation of pshychologists and their resear h
