social influence: situational variables (obedience) Flashcards
What did Stanley Milgram investigate in his studies?
Situational variables affecting obedience
Milgram conducted variations of his obedience study to explore how different conditions influenced participants’ willingness to obey.
What was the obedience rate in Milgram’s baseline study?
65%
This rate reflects the percentage of participants who followed instructions to administer shocks.
How did proximity affect obedience in Milgram’s variations?
Obedience decreased as proximity increased
When the Teacher and Learner were in the same room, obedience dropped to 40%.
What was the obedience rate when the Teacher had to force the Learner’s hand onto the electroshock plate?
30%
This scenario is referred to as the touch proximity variation.
What effect did remote instruction have on obedience rates?
Obedience reduced to 20.5%
In this variation, the Experimenter communicated with the Teacher via telephone.
What behavior did participants exhibit in the remote instruction variation?
Participants frequently pretended to give shocks
This indicates a significant psychological distance from the act of causing harm.
Fill in the blank: Decreased proximity allows people to psychologically distance themselves from the _______.
consequences of their actions
This psychological distancing contributes to higher rates of obedience.
What was the obedience rate in the run-down office block variation of Milgram’s study?
47.5%
This variation showed a significant drop in obedience compared to the original study conducted at Yale University.
How did the prestigious university environment affect participants’ obedience in Milgram’s study?
It gave legitimacy and authority to the study.
Participants perceived the Experimenter as sharing this legitimacy, which increased obedience.
What was the obedience rate when the Experimenter was replaced by an ordinary member of the public?
20%
This was the lowest obedience rate observed in the variations of the study.
What role did the Experimenter’s uniform play in Milgram’s study?
It symbolized authority.
The grey lab coat worn by the Experimenter in the baseline study was a recognized symbol of authority.
True or False: Uniforms encourage obedience.
True
Uniforms are seen as legitimate symbols of authority, which increases the likelihood of obedience.
Fill in the blank: Someone without a uniform has less right to expect our _______.
obedience
This statement reflects the societal perception of authority associated with uniforms.
What situational variable was studied by Leonard Bickman to assess its effect on obedience?
Uniforms worn by confederates
Bickman had confederates dress in a jacket and tie, a milkman’s outfit, and a security guard’s uniform.
What was the main finding of Bickman’s field experiment regarding obedience?
People were twice as likely to obey the assistant dressed as a security guard compared to the one in a jacket and tie
This demonstrates the powerful effect of situational variables on obedience.
What did the research by Wim Meeus and Quintin Raaijmakers (1986) reveal about obedience in Dutch participants?
90% of participants obeyed in a stressful interview scenario
Participants were ordered to say stressful things to a confederate desperate for a job.
What effect did the proximity of the person giving orders have on obedience in Meeus and Raaijmakers’ study?
Obedience decreased dramatically when the person giving orders was not present
This finding replicated Milgram’s conclusions about proximity.
What did Peter Smith and Michael Bond (1998) find regarding the cross-cultural replications of Milgram’s research?
Only two replications occurred in culturally different countries (India and Jordan)
Most other replications were in countries culturally similar to the US.
What is a limitation of Milgram’s research concerning internal validity?
Participants may have been aware the procedure was faked
This criticism was highlighted by Martin Orne and Charles Holland (1968).
What example did Milgram recognize as potentially leading participants to doubt the authenticity of the study?
The variation where the Experimenter is replaced by a member of the public
Milgram acknowledged that this situation was so contrived that participants might see through the deception.
What are demand characteristics in the context of Milgram’s studies?
Participants may have ‘play-acted’ due to recognizing the deception
This raises questions about whether findings are genuinely due to obedience.
