Social Influence- Obedience: Milgram's research Flashcards
Obedience -
A form of social influence in which an individual follows a direct order. The person issuing the order is usually a figure of authority, who has the power to punish when obedient behaviour is not forthcoming.
What was the aim of Milgram’s original obedience study?
To investigate why people obey authority figures, inspired by the high levels of obedience observed during the Holocaust, and to determine if Germans were uniquely obedient.
What was the procedure of Milgram’s study?
Milgram recruited 40 male participants through advertisements, offering $4.50 for participation. Participants were assigned the role of ‘teacher’ and instructed to administer electric shocks to a ‘learner’ (a confederate) for incorrect answers on a memory task. Shocks ranged from 15 to 450 volts, with the learner feigning distress and eventually silence. The experimenter used verbal prods to encourage participants to continue.
What were the findings of Milgram’s study?
65% of participants administered the maximum 450-volt shock, despite the learner’s apparent distress. All participants continued to at least 300 volts, and 12.5% stopped at 300 volts. Participants showed extreme tension, including sweating, trembling, and seizures.
What did Milgram conclude about obedience?
Milgram concluded that ordinary people are highly likely to obey authority figures, even when it involves harming others, suggesting situational factors override personal morality.
What is a criticism of Milgram’s study regarding internal validity?
Orne and Holland (1968) argued participants may not have believed the shocks were real, reducing internal validity. However, Sheridan and King’s (1972) study with real shocks supported Milgram’s findings, as participants still obeyed.
What is a strength of Milgram’s study regarding external validity?
Milgram argued the lab setting reflected real-life authority relationships. Hofling et al. (1966) found high obedience among nurses obeying unjustified doctor’s orders, supporting the generalizability of Milgram’s findings.
How does the replication Le Jeu de la Mort support Milgram’s findings?
In this French TV replication, 80% of participants administered the maximum shock, displaying similar behaviors (e.g., nervous laughter, anxiety) to Milgram’s participants, confirming the robustness of his results.
What does social identity theory (SIT) suggest about obedience in Milgram’s study?
SIT argues participants obeyed because they identified with the experimenter and the scientific goals. When participants identified less with the experimenter and more with the victim, obedience decreased. The fourth prod (“You have no other choice”) led to participants quitting, as it undermined their identification with the experimenter.
Why is SIT considered a limitation of Milgram’s conclusions?
SIT suggests obedience is not solely about authority but about group identification, challenging Milgram’s emphasis on situational authority as the primary driver of obedience.
What ethical issues were raised in Milgram’s study?
Milgram deceived participants about the true nature of the study, including the random role assignment and the reality of the shocks. Diana Baumrind (1964) criticized this deception, arguing it betrayed participants’ trust and could harm the reputation of psychological research.
Why is deception problematic in psychological research?
Deception can cause psychological distress, undermine trust in researchers, and lead to skepticism about future studies. It also raises ethical concerns about informed consent and participant welfare.
What evidence suggests participants believed the shocks were real?
Milgram reported 70% of participants believed the shocks were genuine, and qualitative data (e.g., extreme tension, seizures) indicated participants experienced significant stress, supporting the authenticity of their reactions.
How did Milgram debrief participants?
Participants were assured their behavior was normal, debriefed about the study’s true purpose, and sent follow-up questionnaires. 84% reported feeling glad to have participated.
What does Milgram’s study reveal about human behavior?
The study demonstrates the powerful influence of situational factors and authority on behavior, showing that ordinary people can act against their moral beliefs under pressure from authority figures.
How did Milgram’s study challenge preconceptions about obedience?
Prior to the study, psychology students predicted only 3% of participants would administer the maximum shock. The high obedience rate (65%) contradicted these expectations, revealing the unexpected power of situational authority.
What does Milgram’s study suggest about the role of authority in real-life situations?
The study suggests that authority figures can exert significant influence over individuals’ actions, even in harmful contexts, highlighting the importance of understanding obedience in real-world settings like workplaces, military, and institutions.
How does Milgram’s study contribute to our understanding of the Holocaust?
The study provides insight into how ordinary people can commit harmful acts under authority, offering a psychological explanation for the widespread obedience observed during the Holocaust.
What are the broader implications of Milgram’s findings?
Milgram’s findings highlight the potential for situational factors to override personal ethics, raising important questions about moral responsibility, authority, and the conditions under which people resist or comply with harmful orders.
