Social Influence: Obedience - Milgram's Experiment, Situational Variables Flashcards
What Is Obedience?
- When an individual follows a direct order from a person who is usually a figure of authority, who has the power to punish when obedient behaviour does not occur.
What Is Destructive Obedience?
- When an individual obeys an order to do something immoral, which causes the individual carrying out the order distress and regret.
Milgram’s Experiment.
Aim: Wanted to know if the Germans were different and more obedient to authority figures, than people in other countries. Wanted to find out if ordinary American citizens would obey an unjust order from an authority figure even if it was harming another person.
Procedure: Sample for 40 male participants from different backgrounds. All volunteers from an advert in a local paper. Were invited to a lab at Yale University and met with experimenter and another participant (Mr Wallace and a confederate). The experimenter explained that one person would be randomly assigned the role of teach and other would be a learner (however the participant would always be the teacher). The teacher watched the learner be strapped to an electric chair and were given sample electric shocks to make the procedure seem real. Experimenter explained that the teacher would read the learner a series of words and if the learner made a mistake the teacher would give the learner an electric shock and increase voltage level each time. Electric shocks increased so did learners screams. At 315 volts learner banged on the wall and at 330 volts he became silent. The experiment continued until teacher refused to continue or when 450 volts were reached. Each time teacher wanted to stop experiment the experiment would respond with a series of prods.
Findings: Participants went to 300 volts and 65% continued to the full 450 volts. Participants showed signs of extreme tension (sweat, stutter, groan etc). Three participants had uncontrollable seizures. Milgram asked 14 students how many they believed would continue 450 volts - they predicted 3%.
Conclusion: Under the right circumstances ordinary people will do unjust orders. The Germans were not different to other people from different countries.
Milgram’s Experiment Evaluation: Weakness - Ethics
- Milgram deceived his participants as he said the experiment was on ‘punishment and learning.’
- He was actually measuring obedience and he pretended the learner was receiving electric shocks.
- The participants may not have consented to take part in the study, had they known what as actually involved.
- The general public may lose trust in psychologists and not want to take part in future research if they hear that participants are being lied to and unable to give informed consent.
Milgram’s Experiment Evaluation: Weakness - Validity.
- Milgram’s study has been criticised for lacking ecological validity.
- Milgram tested obedience in a laboratory, which is very different to real-life situations of obedience, where people are often asked to follow more subtle instructions, rather than administering electric shocks.
- This means that the findings from Milgram’s study are not helpful in finding out about obedience in real life.
- Some would argue that the costs of completing the research do not outweigh the benefits and therefore it is meaningless.
Milgram’s Experiment Evaluation: Weakness - Generalisability.
- Milgram’s research lacked population validity.
- Milgram used a bias sample of 40 male American volunteers.
- This means that the results cannot be applied to other groups of people, in particularly women, as their level obedience may be very different.
- Only using male participants creates beta bias, where the differences between the behaviour of men and women are ignored and causes male behaviour to be viewed as the ‘standard’ response.
Milgram’s Experiment Evaluation: Strength - Reliability.
- Other studies into obedience have found similar results to Milgram.
- Le Jeu de la Mort is documentary about reality TV and it included a replication of Milgram’s study. The participants believed that they were contestants in a pilot episode for a new game show. They were paid to give (fake) electric shocks, when ordered to by the presenter to other participants (confederates). 80% of the participants delivered the maximum shocks of 460 volts and their behaviour is almost identical to Milgram’s participants.
- This replication supports Milgram’s original conclusions about obedience to authority and demonstrates that his findings were not just a fluke.
- The consistency of the findings in turn improves the validity of Milgram’s findings as it suggests that they were an accurate representation of how people behave under authority.
Milgram’s Experiment Evaluation: Strength - Validity.
- There is further support for Milgram’s findings from Sheridan and Kind (1972).
- They conducted a similar study where real shocks were given to a puppy. Despite the shocks being real 54% of the male participants and 100% of females delivered what they thought was a fatal shock.
- This suggests that the effects in Milgram’s study were genuine because people behaved the same way with real shocks.
- This increases validity of Milgram’s findings and shows how much people will actually follow the orders of an authority figure.
What Are Situational Variables?
- Features of an environment that impact the degree to which individuals obey.
- They include proximity, location and uniform.
Proximity is the physical closeness or distance of an authority figure to the person they are giving the order to and also refers to the closeness of the person carrying out the order to their victim.
Location refers the place where an order is issued. The status of prestige of the place can impact on obedience.
Uniform refers to the clothes an authority figure wears that symbolise their position of authority.
Milgram’s Variation - Proximity
- In original study the teacher and learner were in adjusting rooms so teacher can hear learner but not see them.
- Original study 60% participants obeyed.
- When teachers and learner were in the same room obedience was 40%.
- In one variation the teacher had to force the learner’s hand into an electric shock plate this dropped obedience to 30%.
- When experimenter was in a different room to the teacher and gave the orders on phone obedience dropped to 20.5%.
- The closer the vicitim the lower the obedience, the further the experimenter the lower the obedience.
Milgram’s Variation - Location.
- Originally conducted at Yale University.
- In the variation Milgram changed the location to a run down building (office block).
- Obedience dropped to 47.5%.
- The more prestige the location is the higher obedience is.
Milgram’s Variation - Uniform.
- Original experiment the experimenter was wearing a grey lab coat.
- Variation they wore ‘everyday/ordinary clothes.’
- Obedience dropped to 20%.
- The more casual clothes they wore the less people obeyed.
Situational Variables Evaluation: Strength - Uniform Valid Explanation.
- Uniform is a valid explanation for obedience.
- Bickman had three confederates - one wore a jacket and a tie, one was a milkman and one a security guard - they asked the public to pick up litter or pay money for the parking meter.
- He found that the public were more likely to obey to the security guard than other confederates.
- This supports the situational variable explanation of obedience because it shows that uniform (security guard) impacts the level of obedience shown in an everyday situation.
Situational Variables Evaluation: Weakness - Lacks Internal Validiity.
- Milgram’s study lacks internal validity as there were demand characteristics.
- Orne and Holland argued that the participants would have worked out that the procedure was fake, particularly because one condition had the experimenter replaced by a member of the public.
- This means that the results are not valid because people did not act ‘naturally’ in the experiment, they could have changed the way that they behaved either through the please-u or screw-u effect meaning that Milgram was not able to measure the effects of situational variables on obedience.
- This is therefore a weakness of the study, which in turn s weakness the evidence of explanation of obedience.
Situational Variables Evaluation: Strength - Replication In Other Cultures.
- The situational variables studies have been replicated in other cultures.
- Miranda et al found obedience rate of over 90% amongst Spanish students.
- This suggests that this explanation of obedience can be seen as valid, as it can explain how uniform, proximity and location can affect obedience levels in cultures across the world.
