Variables affecting obedience - Milgram Flashcards
What was the aim of study (1963)
To observe whether people would obey a figure of authority when
told to harm another person i.e. evaluating the influence of a
destructive authority figure.
What ppts took place in Milgram’s (1963) study
Randomly selected participants - 40 male volunteers.
What was the procedure of Milgram’s (1963) study
A participant given the role of ‘teacher’ and a confederate given the
role of ‘learner’. This was decided through a random allocation.
Participant had to ask the confederate a series of questions.
Whenever the confederate got the answer wrong, the participant
had to give him an electric shock, even when no answer was given.
The electric shocks incremented by 15 volts at a time, ranging from
300V to 450V, where 330V was marked as ‘lethal’.
Participants thought the shocks were real when in fact there were
no real shocks administered, and the confederate was acting. The
shocks were falsely demonstrated to be real prior to the start of the
study.
Participants were assessed on how many volts they were willing to
shock the confederate with.
The experimenter’s role was to give a series of orders / prods when
the participant refused to administer a shock, which increased in
terms of demandingness for every time the participant refused to
administer a shock. The same 4 prods were used each time when
participants refused to administer the shocks. The first 3 demanded
obedience to science, whereas the final prod demanded obedience
specifically to the confederate.
What were the findings of Milgram’s (1963)
All participants went up to 300V and 65% went up to 450V.
No participants stopped below 300V, whilst only 12.5% stopped at
300V, showing that the vast majority of participants were prepared
to give lethal electric shocks to a confederate.
How did proximity affect Milgram’s study (1963)
Participants obeyed more when the experimenter was in the same room i.e. 62.5%.
This was reduced to 40% when the experimenter and participant were in separate rooms.
Then reduced to a further 30% in the touch proximity condition i.e. where the experimenter
forcibly placed the participant’s hand on the electric plate.
How did Location affect obedience in Milgram’s (1963)?
Participants obeyed more when the study was conducted at a
prestigious university i.e. Stanford.
Why did Location affect obedience according to Milgram’s (1963) study
A university/ prestige location such as Stanford demands obedience and also may increase the trust that the participant places in the integrity of the researchers and their experiments.
How did Uniform affect obedience levels according to Milgram’s (1963) study?
Participants obeyed more when the experimenter wore a lab coat. It was found
that obedience was much higher when the experimenter wore a lab
coat as opposed to normal clothes. However, demand characteristics
were particularly evident in this condition, with even Milgram admitting
that many participants could see through this deception.
Why did Obedience levels change according to Milgram’s (1963) study?
A person is more likely to obey someone wearing a uniform as it gives
them a higher status and a greater sense of legitimacy.
Name 2 strengths of Milgram’s (1963) study
Highly replicable – The procedure has been repeated all over the
world, where consistent and similar obedience levels have been
found. For example, in a replication of Milgram’s study using the TV
pseudonym of Le Jeu de la Mort, researchers found that 85% of
participants were willing to give lethal electric shocks to an
unconscious man (confederate), whilst being cheered on by a
presenter and a TV audience. Such replication increases the
reliability of the findings.
Debriefing - The participants were thoroughly and carefully
debriefed on the real aims of the study, in an attempt to deal with
the ethical breach of the guideline of protection from deception and
the possibility to give informed consent. In a follow up study
conducted a year later, 84% of participants were glad they were
part of the study and 74% felt as if they learned something. This
suggests that the study left little or no permanent or long-term
psychological harm on participants.
Name 2 weaknesses of Milgram’s (1963) study
Lack of ecological validity – The tasks given to participants are not
like those we would encounter in real life e.g. shooting somebody in
the face is different from flicking a switch, meaning that the
methodology lacks mundane realism, producing results which are low
in ecological validity.
It raises a socially sensitive issue – Milgram’s findings suggest that
those who are responsible for killing innocent people can be excused
because it is not their personality that made them do this, but it is
because of the situation that they were in and the fact that it is difficult
to disobey – some may strongly disagree with this, and especially the
judicial system, where (except in viable cases of diminished
responsibility), individuals are expected to take moral responsibility for
their actions.
