Week 3 - Obedience Flashcards
Relevant Background: What forces shaped Milgram’s motivation to study conformity?
Milgram Himself:
–> Came from a Jewish Family
–> Interested in replicating the Asch paradigm with different cultures, groups, and procedural modifications, (as well as the ethics of the Asch paradigm)
The Holocaust
–> Milgram struggled to comprehend the incomprehensible: what led to the persecution of Jews, homosexuals, gypsies, communists, and other groups by the Nazis
The Banality of Evil
–> Adolf Eichmann trial: Eichmann did not appear to be a monster, and yet allowed for the persecutions and tortures during the holocaust
The Lack of Relevance of Psychology
–> Milgram was also frustrated that a lot of psychology experiments had very little relevance to humans (particularly the Asch paradigm)
Experiment: Aims + What was the initial study?
Aims: To investigate the extent to which individuals would obey authority figures when instructed to potentially harm another person
Initial Study: Milgram’s studies are often remembered as one study, but in fact they were a large series of studies with 24 variations –> with over 780+ volunteers
–> No ‘heart condition’
–> No learner complaints
–> Result: 100% compliance
Experiment: Participants NB: All main information beyond this is the famous ‘basic’ study No.5
Participants were 40 males, aged between 20 and 50.
Jobs ranged from unskilled to professional
From the New Haven area (USA)
Paid $4.50 just for turning up
Experiment: Methods
Controlled Experiment - Each participant was paired with a ‘learner’ who was a confederate. The draw was fixed so that the participant was always a teacher.
Experiment: Procedure
Learner with a “heart condition”
Learner (a recording) complains, moans and shouts (controlled for each trial)
Physical seperation betweenthe learner and the teacher-participant
–> Experimenter in the same room as the teacher-participant
Teacher was instructed to read a series of word pairs to the learner.
If the learner was incorrect (he did give mostly incorrect answers) then the teacher would administer an electric shock from a 0-450V machine (not an actual shock machine)
If the participant-teacher began to get uncomfortable the experimenter would use four prods:
–> Please continue
–> The experiment requires that you continue
–> You have no other choice, you must go on
Findings
Milgram’s colleagues predicted that less than 1% of participants would go to 450V
Found that
- 65% went maximum to 450V
- 35% stopped before 450V
- 0% stopped before 150V - at 150V 13% stopped
Debate: Ethics
Debrief: Milgram claimed all were debriefed but…
–> 2-min debriefing in which their behaviour was explained as natural
–> A fuller explanation was mailed 1 year after participation - because he was finishing his studies off (this delay was deliberate to ensure other participants did not already know about it)
Harm
–> From post-experimental feedback participants majority were either somewhat nervous and extremely upset
–> Lip-biting, nervous laughter in 14/40, seizures in 3/40
–> Psychologists/Writers at the time: branded the experiment “so vile” “emotionally disturbing” “clearly extremely distressing for participants”
Debate: Experimental Control
Participants claimed that the 4 prod limit was untrue
–> The experimenters prompted MANY more times (closer to 26!)
–> Women in particular were “railroaded” by the experimenter (eg. the experimenter bought them coffee)
Methods: Replications and Variations
Replications
–> The basic study was replicated 24 times from 1963 to 1985 across USA, Europe, Middle East: modal finding was that 65% of participant’s go to 450V
Variations
–> Results reduced in obedience from the basic 65% when:
o Conducted at a less prestigious institution
o Teacher in same room as learner
o Teacher had to touch learner to administer shocks
o Experimenter absent (delivered via phone)
o Defiant model - there is a second confederate who is a teacher and refuses to participate at certain points
Controversy: Demand Characteristics and Ecological Validity
Were participants really deceived or were they responding to “demand characteristics”
–> Participants noticed that the learner never responded to them (sounds appeared to be audio recordings)
–> Report showed that the majority of participants who were doubters of the experiment did not show obedience
BUT: Milgram said this was the participants being ashamed, and said they ‘had doubts’ as self-defence to rationalise their behaviour
Ecological Validity: Does this experiment tell us anything about reality given the set up is in a lab? Had inspired many replications:
–> Eg. Nurses who overdose, virtual victim etc.
Debate: What is the theory behind these findings? (Interpretation)
Milgram’s research SHOWS us that many people conform to authority, but doesn’t tell us WHY they do it
–> Milgram identified a number of key features:
o Readiness to relinquish responsiblity
o Entering the ‘agentic state’ (willingness to accept another’s definition of reality)
Theorist Explanations:
SOCIAL IMPACT (LATANE)
–> We are influenced by authority figures (obey them) as a function of their:
o Strength (status)
o Immediacy
o Number
SOCIAL IDENTITY - SELF CATEGORISATION (TURNER)
–> We are influenced by authority figures to the extent that:
o We identify with the group they represent
We are influenced by their instructions to harm others to the extent that
o we don’t identify with those ‘others’
BURGER’S INTERPRETATION
–> Burger replicated the study looking at the experimental prods
o Found 100% disobeyed after receiving prod 4 “You have no other choice, you must continue”
Legacy and Impact
One of the most famous studies EVER
Informed debate in theology, ethics, law, management etc.
Massive impact on the public and scientific understanding of evil
Within Psychology:
–> Ideas on ethical considerations around participant distress
–> Studying people in “natural” experiments that mimic real life
