Social Influence- Milgrims Study Flashcards
Obedience is
Carrying out instructions of an authority figure assumed without figure,wouldn’t of acted without command
Results
All administered atleast 300 volts. 65% obeyed to give full 450
Sweating,trembling,digging nails into hands,3 had full blown uncontrollable panic attacks
Conlusion
Under certain circumstances ,participants will obey authority figure,even when feeling uncomfortable doing so
Aim
To see if Americans would obey unjust order from person in authority to inflict pain or worse
Method /deception
40 volunteers told taking part in study on role of punishment on learning (real aim test obedience to authority).naives=teacher,”learner” had to memorise word pairs .learner was confed,fixed roles,
Method Location
Yale uni lab
What the participants had to do method
Teacher tested learner on ability to remember word pairs by giving first word of the pair.when wrong ,told to give electric shocks.started low volts then increased.to max 450.enogh to kill.not real shocks.but participants didn’t know and belived they were.
Method authorit fig
“Experimenter”over see in same room dressed in white lab coat.wen naive start worry hesitate experimenter encouraged them with prods “please contiue”,”you have no other choice” “ u must go on”
Research support
Finding found in French documentary bout reality TV Beauvois et Al 2012
Participants thought applying to be contestants in show called game of death.
Had to give shocks to other participants (actors) infront of studio audience,80% gave full 450 volt to “unconscious man “ ,same behaviours as milgrims supports validity -not just special circumstances would think ppl less obedient in 20212
High control
Uses experimental method,instruction given,presence of experimenter with same lab coat iv to dv cause and effect relationship.
Low ecological
Task artificial -giving strangers electric shocks not normal everyday task
Low ecological validity counterpoint
Many showed signs of stress ,nervous laughter sweating ,trembling
Low internal validity
Not testing what intended
75% believed shocks genuine 25%didn’t.play acting-holland 1968
Perry 2013 studied it saw only half naive believed real 2/3 of these disobedient
Demand characters -trying to fulfil aim of study.
Internal validity counter point
Sheridan and King 1972 -bCk then women more obedient
Real shocks to puppy,despite distress puppy infront of them,54%male 100% female gave fatal shocks
Proves shocks were genuine in milgrams cus obedient even when real.
Ethics
Deception
Did not know wasn’t giving real electric shocks or experimenter learner were confeds or real aim of study or that it was fixed roles
No protection from psychological harm ,-stress, tension trembling sweating stuttering laughing nervously biting lips digging finger nails in hand
Go against BPS
Ethics counter point
Milgram interviewd them after many said pleased to be involved in study.necassary to decieve participants if rela aim cause dema char .would suggest ppl less obedient then acc are
