social influence: obedience Flashcards
What is obedience?
A type of social influence which causes a person to act in response to an order given by an authority figure.
What was the aim of Milgram’s study?
To understand why the German population followed Hitler’s orders and slaughtered 10 million Jews and to see if participants would obey orders to administer electric shocks.
Who were the participants in Milgram’s study?
40 American males who volunteered by responding to an advertisement in a newspaper.
Where did Milgram’s experiment take place?
Yale University.
What compensation did participants receive for taking part in the study?
$4.50.
In the experiment, what roles did the participants take?
Teacher (always the participant) and learner (the confederate).
What was the setup for the learner in Milgram’s study?
The learner was strapped to a wire and chair.
What was the range of electric shocks administered by the teacher?
15 to 450 volts.
What were the four verbal prods given by the experimenter?
- Please continue
- The experiment requires that you continue
- It is absolutely essential you continue
- You have no choice you must go on.
What percentage of participants stopped at 300 volts?
12.5%.
What percentage of participants continued to the highest level of 450 volts?
65%.
What behaviours did Milgram observe during the experiment?
sweating, trembling, stuttering, biting lips, groaning, and digging fingernails into hands.
How many participants had full-blown seizures during the experiment?
Three participants.
What did 14 psychology students predict about participants’ behavior before the experiment?
that no more than 3 participants would administer a shock of 450 volts
AO3: real life application
The study can explain the holocaust, whereby German soldiers obeyed the orders of Hilter and killed over 10 000 Jews.
The study suggests that the German soldiers obeyed Hilter orders because he was considered an
authority figure.
STRENGTH because it can be used to explain why destructive obedience occurs. As a result, we can educate people on the power of authority figures and prevent situations such as the holocaust from happening
again
AO3: cross-cultural replication
it has been replicated cross culturally
Miranda et al. found an obedience rate of over 90% amongst Spanish students
STRENGTH as Milgram’s conclusions are not limited to American males but are valid across cultures and apply to females to. So the conclusion that we are socialised to recognise obedience and react with authority is representative of the entire population.
COUNTER: However, Smith and Bond argue that most replications have taken place in western, developed societies. Thier countries are culturally not that different from American, so it would be premature to conclude that Milgram’s findings about obedience apply to the entire population.
AO3: external validity
participants were performing an artificial task, that is different to real life situations of obedience
In this study participants were asked to administer an electric shock every time the confederate got an answer wrong.
WEAKNESS because the** task does not resemble real life orders ** from an authority figure, as people are usually asked to follow more subtle instructions. Therefore we are unable to generalise Milgram’s findings to real life situations
and cannot conclude that people would obey less severe instructions in the same way.
AO3: internal validity
it is high in internal validity
This is because the participants were physically and psychologically affected by the study, which indicates
that they believed the electric shocks were real. In this study many participants were seen to sweat, tremble, stutter, bite their lip, etc. In addition, three participants even had full blown seizures.
STRENGTH because participants believed the situation was real, and therefore their behaviour was natural. So the study is high in internal validity.
EXPAND: This is supported by Sheridan and Kind who found all participants gave real shocks to a puppy in response to orders from an experimenter. Despite the real distress of the animal, 54% of the men and 100% of the women gave what they thought was a fatal shock. This suggests that the effects in Milgram’s study were genuine because people behaved obediently even when the shocks were real
AO3: unethical > right to withdraw
When participants wanted to leave the study, they were verbally persuaded by the experimenter to continue (eg: please continue, the experiment requires that you continue, it is absolutely essential you continue, you have no choice you must go on.)
WEAKNESS because it breaks the ethical guideline, right to withdraw
COUNTER: However, Milgram argued that this ethical violation is justified as the study was about obedience, so the orders were necessary. Milgram pointed out that although the right to withdraw was made partially difficult, it was possible as 35% of participants had chosen to withdraw.
AO3: unethical > harm to ppts
participants were asked to administer an electric shock to the learner which is an extremely stressful situation which caused physical and psychological harm to participants.
eg: Three participants even had full blown seizures.
WEAKNESS because it breaks the ethical guidelines protection from physical and psychological harm.
COUNTER: However, Milgram argued that this ethical violation is justified because these **effects were only short-term **Also, he did debrief the participants after the experiment and found that once the participants and could see the confederate was not harmed their stress levels decreased. Milgram also followed the sample up a year later and found that there were no signs of any long-term psychological harm. In fact, the majority of the participants (83.7%) said that they were pleased that they had
participate.
AO3: unethical > deception
The participants believed that the electric shocks were real and that they were actually harming the learner. The participants were unaware that the learner was actually a confederate.
This is evident because the participants showed signs of distress because they believed they were actually harming the learner.
WEAKNESS because it breaks the ethical guideline, deception.
COUNTER: However, Milgram did debrief participants afterwards. He found that** 83.7% said that they were “glad to be in the experiment,”**. This suggests that despite being deceived participants were glad to have participated in the study.
