Social influence: Situational variables affecting obedience

Question 1

What are the situation variables that affect obedience?

Answer 1

• Proximity
• Location
• Uniform

Milgram varied the basic procedure to demonstrate how these factors affected the rate of obedience.

Question 2

Explain the effect of proximity on obedience.

Answer 2

People are more likely be obey an authority figure who is in close proximity (i.e. nearby). In Milgram’s study, the experimenter was in the same room as the participant (i.e. teacher). If the authority figure is distant it is easier to be resistant to their orders.

Question 3

Explain the effect of location on obedience.

Answer 3

Milgram’s obedience experiment was conducted at Yale, a prestigious university in America. The high status of the university gave the study credibility and respect in the eyes of the participants, thus making them more likely to obey.
When Milgram moved his experiment to a set of run down offices rather than the impressive Yale University obedience dropped to 47.5%. This suggests that status of location effects obedience.

Question 4

Explain the effect of uniform on obedience.

Answer 4

Milgram’s experimenter (Mr Williams) wore a laboratory coat (a symbol of scientific expertise) which gave him high status. But when the experimenter dressed in everyday clothes obedience was very low. The uniform of the authority figure can give them status.

Question 5

What was Milgram’s aim of the study?

Answer 5

To investigate participants willingness to obey an authority figure to an extreme extent.

Question 6

What was the procedure of Milgram’s study

Answer 6

Put an advert in a paper to study punishment and learning.
Recruited 40 ppts. The study had naive ppts, confederate and an experimenter.
Yale University.
The teacher was naive, confederate was the learner.
Word pairs are learnt. Mistakes led to an electric shock.
Electric shock 15v-450v 1/10 of the final shock.
20 variations.

Question 7

What were the finding of Milgram’s study?

Answer 7

In the original vocal feedback condition 100% went to 300v, 65% went to 450v. Milgram conducted variations (20) and found factors such as proximity, location and uniform.

Question 8

What was the conclusion of Milgram’s study?

Answer 8

People will obey an authority figure to an extreme extent but situational variables can affect this.

Question 9

Evidence for proximity:

Answer 9

Proximity refers to how aware individuals are of the consequences of their actions. Obedience tends to be higher when the individual can divorce themselves from the consequences. E.g. In a war situation, it could be argued that launching a missile from a remote location is easier than shooting a single person

Milgram carried out a number of variations of his original experiment in which he manipulated the proximity of the teacher (participant) and learned (confederate). (1) Learner and teacher seated in the same room obedience to 450 volts dropped from 65% to 40%(2) Teacher having to force the learner’s hand on a plate that administered the electric shock (touch proximity), obedience to 450 volts dropped to 30%(3) Experimenter (authority figure) gave instructions to the teacher (participant) via a phone (experimenter and participant were in a separate room. Obedience to 450 volts dropped to only 21%.

Question 10

Evidence for location:

Answer 10

The location of an environment can be relevant to the amount of perceived legitimate authority an authority figure is considered to have. Obedience rates will be higher if the location is considered appropriate, specifically in institutional settings where obedience to authority is expected.

Milgram moved his research to a run-down office in a poor area of New York. In this version of the experiment, the authority figure was not wearing smart clothing. Milgram found that obedience rates in this version of the experiment dropped to only 47.5% of participants shocking to 450 volts compared to 65% in the original Yale experiment.

Question 11

Evidence for uniform:

Answer 11

A uniform can add to the legitimacy of an authority figure. Obedience rates are higher when the person giving the orders is dressed in a formal way.

Bickman (1974) found the following obedience rates when ordering people in New York to pick up rubbish, loan a coin to a stranger to move away from a bus stop Civilian 14%, Security guard = 38%

Question 12

Evidence for authoritarian personality

Answer 12

A personality type characterised by a belief of absolute obedience, submission to authority and domination of minorities. Adorno suggested that this personality type was shaped in childhood by hierarchical, authoritarian parenting. They find social change disruptive, and anxiety-inducing.

Elms & Milgram found that highly obedient participants in Milgram’s study were more significantly authoritarian (using F-scale) than disobedient participants. Altemeyer found those participants with an authoritarian personality type who were ordered to give themselves shocks, administered higher shocks than those without the personality type.

Question 13

A03: Milgrams study

Answer 13

+ Replicated in real-life settings
+ Historical validity
- Androcentric
- Lack of ecological validity

Question 14

A03: Replicated in real-life settings

Answer 14

The results obtained in Milgram’s study of obedience have been replicated in real-life settings. For example, Hofling (1966) conducted a study in a hospital. Nurses were telephoned by a Dr Smith who asked that they administered a drug to a patient. This order went against hospital regulations in a number of ways; (1) nurses were not supposed to take instructions over the phone, (2) the instructions were from an unknown doctor and (3) the dosage of the drug was twice that advised on the bottle. Nevertheless, 21 out of 22 (95%) nurses did as requested. This is a strength because the research demonstrates that obedience to authority figures does occur in real-life settings.

Question 15

A03: Historical validity

Answer 15

We might be tempted to dismiss the relevance of Milgram study simply because it was carried out over 50 years ago. What would happen if the same studies were carried out today? Blass (1999) carried out a statistical analysis of obedience studies carried out between 1961 and 1985. By carrying out a correlational analysis relating each study year or publication and the amount of obedience it found, he found no relationship whatsoever. A more recent study by burger (2009) found levels of obedience almost identical to those found by Milgram some 46 years earlier. These findings suggest that Milgram’s findings still appear to apply as much today as they did back in the early 1960s.

Question 16

A03: Androcentric

Answer 16

The study can be criticised for being androcentric. For example, the research was populated by male volunteers only, which means that the research only tests the male response to obedience. This is a problem because it means the results can’t be generalised to women as they have not been part of the research and may in fact have responded differently to authority than the men. Some research suggests that women are actually more obedient than men, Sheridan & King found that 100% of women, compared to 54% of men, administered fake electric shocks to a puppy when it responded incorrectly to a command.

Question 17

A03: Lack of ecological validity

Answer 17

However, Milgram’s research can be criticised for lacking ecological validity. For example, Orne & Holland suggested that participants in Milgram’s study only administered the shocks because they didn’t believe they were real. This is problematic because the findings from the study cannot be generalised past the artificial setting to everyday life as the research is likely to have recorded artificial behaviour.