social influence- obedience

Question 1

evaluation-milgram’s original
strength: control variables (3)

Answer 1

-systematically altered one variable at a time and keeping other variables controlled
-can be more sure of cause and effect so situational variables would be causing the change in obedience to authority
-has been replicated with similar findings-consistent and reliable- scientific credibility

Question 2

evaluation-milgram’s original
strength: debriefing (4)

Answer 2

-participants were debriefed on the real aims of the study
-84% glad they took part
-74% felt they learnt something
-study left little/no permanent psychological harm

Question 3

evaluation: milgram’s original
criticism: lack of ecological validity (2)

Answer 3

-lab situations are different to real life- fidings can’t be generalised
-in real life people are given more subtle orders rather than electric shocks

Question 4

evaluation- milgram’s original
criticism: ethical issues (3)

Answer 4

-deception- participants believed shocks were real and roles were random so they couldn’t give informed consent
-right to withdraw- experimenter’s prods gave participants a sense they couldn’t withdraw
-psychological harm- some had anxiety and seizures- they were purposefully exposed to a stressful situation

Question 5

evaluation- milgram’s situational variables
strength: research support (Bickman, uniform variable) real-life application (2)

Answer 5

-field experiment in new york, 3 confeds (security guard uniform, milkman outfit, jacket and tie) asked passersbys to pick up litter/give coin for parking metre
-findings: people are twice as likely to obey security guard-uniform is a key situation factor for people to lose/gain authority

Question 6

evaluation- milgram’s situational variables
strength: cultural differences (5)

Answer 6

replication of milgram’s study
-australian participants: 16% went to 450V
-german pasticipants: 85% went to 450V
-in some cultures authority is more likely to be accepted as legitimate. There’s a difference in obedience depending on your culture
-supportive findings from cross-cultural research increases validity of the explanation of legitimacy of authority

Question 7

evaluation- milgram’s situational variables
criticism: limited explanation

Answer 7

-legitimacy can’t explain instances of disobedience in a hierarchy where legitimacy of authority is clear
-16/18 nurses disobeyed a doctor’s order to prescribe a drug overdose
-nurses remained autonomous even though doctor was an obvious authority figure

Question 8

evaluation- explanations of obedience
strength: LOA- useful account of cultural differences in obedience (3)

Answer 8

-authority is accept as legitimate in somme cultures as it reflects social structures and how children are raised to perceive authority
-replication of milgram’s study- 16% australians went to 450V, 85% germans went to 450V
-supportive findings from cross-cultural research increases validity

Question 9

evaluation- explanations of obedience
strength: LOA+agentic state research support

Answer 9

-researcher asked viewers ‘who harmed the learner’- they blamed it on experimented due to LOA
-supports explanations as participants were in agentic state
-experimenter had authority due to his attire, so was above the teachers in social hierarchy

Question 10

evaluation- explanations of obedience
criticism: agentic shift doesn’t explain all findings (3)

Answer 10

-16/18 nurses disobeyed a doctor’s order to prescribe a drug overdose
-nurses remained autonomous even though doctor was an obvious authority figure
-we need to consider disposition explanations when understanding agentic state

Question 11

evaluation: AP as an explanation for obedience
strength: research support (3)

Answer 11

-researcher conducted interviews with 20 obedient and 20 disobedient participants in milgram’s study
-obedient scored higher on F-scale
-shows theres a link between AP and obedience

Question 12

evaluation: AP as an explanation for obedience
criticism: politically biased

Answer 12

-only looks at right wing ideology and ignores less wing authoritarianism (Bolshevism)
-adorno’s theory is not a comprehensive dispositional explanation for obedience to authority across the whole political spectrum

Question 13

evaluation: AP as an explanation for obedience
criticism: cant explain obedience on a large scale (3)

Answer 13

-ww2- germans had different personalities, not all had AP, so it cant explain why they obeyed Nazis
-social identity theory is more realistic- explains how individuals create and define their place in society
-germans most likely shared the same struggles and displaced their fear onto inferior people-scapegoating