1b. Evaluation of obedience

What are the strengths of Milgram’s baseline study?

Strengths of Milgram’s baseline study=

• Research Support- Milgram’s findings were replicated in a French documentary

that was made about reality TV.

• Charles Sheridan and Richard King (1972)

  conducted a study using a procedure like Milgram’s.

Why is Research Support- Milgram’s findings being replicated in a French documentary that was made about reality TV a strength?

Research support- Milgram’s findings being replicated in a French documentary that was made about reality TV a strength=

• This documentary (Beauvois et al. 2012) focused on a game show made

  especially for the programme. The participants in the ‘game’ believed they were

  contestants in a pilot episode for a new show called Le Jeu de la Mort (The Game

  of Death). They were paid to give (fake) electric shocks (ordered by the presenter)

  to other participants (who were actually actors) in front of a studio audience. 80%

  of the participants delivered the maximum shock of 460 volts to an apparently

  unconscious man. Their behaviour was almost identical to that of Milgram’s

  participants – nervous laughter, nail-biting and other signs of anxiety.

  This supports Milgram’s original fi ndings about obedience to authority, and

  demonstrates that the findings were not just due to special circumstances.

Why is Charles Sheridan and Richard King (1972)

conducted a study using a procedure like Milgram’s a strength?

Charles Sheridan and Richard King (1972)

conducted a study using a procedure like Milgram’s a strength of his baseline study=

• Participants (all students)

  gave real shocks to a puppy in response to orders from an experimenter.

  Despite the real distress of the animal, 54% of the men and 100% of the

  women gave what they thought was a fatal shock.

  This suggests that the eff ects in Milgram’s study were genuine because

  people behaved obediently even when the shocks were real.

What are the limitations of Milgram’s baseline study?

Limitations of Milgram’s baseline study=

• Low internal validity- that Milgram’s procedure may not have been testing what he

  intended to test

• Milgram’s conclusions about blind obedience may not

  question.

  be justified

Why is Low internal validity- that Milgram’s procedure may not have been testing what he

intended to test a weakness of his baseline study?

Low internal validity- that Milgram’s procedure may not have been testing what he intended to test a weakness=

• Milgram reported that 75% of his participants said they believed the shocks

  were genuine. However Martin Orne and Charles Holland (1968) argued that

  participants behaved as they did because they didn’t really believe in the set up,

  so they were ‘play-acting’. Gina Perry’s (2013) research confi rms this. She listened

  to tapes of Milgram’s participants and reported that only about half of them

  believed the shocks were real. Two-thirds of these participants were disobedient.

  This suggests that participants may have been responding to demand

  characteristics, trying to fulfi l the aims of the study.

Why is that Milgram’s conclusions about blind obedience may not question be justified a weakness of his baseline study?

Milgram’s conclusions about blind obedience may not question be justified a weakness=

• Alex Haslam et al. (2014) showed that Milgram’s participants obeyed when

  the Experimenter delivered the fi rst three verbal prods

• However, every participant who was given the fourth prod (‘You have no other choice, you must go on.’) without exception disobeyed

• According to social identity theory

  (SIT), participants in Milgram’s study only obeyed when they identifi ed with the

  scientifi c aims of the research (‘The experiment requires that you continue’).

  When they were ordered to blindly obey an authority fi gure, they refused.

  This shows that SIT may provide a more valid interpretation of Milgram’s

  fi ndings, especially as Milgram himself suggested that ‘identifying with the

  science’ is a reason for obedience.