Milgram's Study

Explain the key aspects of the procedure of Milgram’s study of obedience

• 40 US men given role of teacher through fixed draw

• Ordered by experimenter to shock learner when they made a mistake in a word recall task

• Shocks increased 15V with each mistake up to 450V

Explain the findings of the baseline variation

• 65% went to the top of the shock scale (450V)

• 100% went to 300V

• Many participants showed signs of stress and objected but continued anyway

• Prior survey suggested only 3% would obey

Explain what conclusions can be drawn from the baseline variation of the experiment

• People are much more likely to obey than we think

• People underestimate the impact of situation on behaviour and overestimate the impact of personality

Identify:

• where the location variation took place

• obedient %

• why obedience changed

• run-down office block

• Obedience dropped to 47.5%

• Business lacked authority of science present at Yale

Identify:

• procedure of the proximity variation

• Obedience %

• Why the obedience changed

• teacher and learner in the same room

• Obedience dropped to 40%

• Teacher could see the learner’s suffering

Explain reasons why some psychologists believe that participants were reacting to demand characteristics

• participants wouldn’t think that researchers would actually harm participants during experiments

• Screams on tape might sound fake

• Unconvincing acting from experimenter

• Perry found evidence of participants questioning experimenter on tapes

Explain reasons why some psychologists believe that participants weren’t reacting to demand characteristics

• participants showed stressed behaviour during the experiments - suggesting they believed the shocks were real

• 75% of participants said afterwards that they did believe the shocks were real

• Participant gave real shocks to puppies in Sheridan & King’s experiment

Identify some standardised elements of the procedure

• feedback from learner on tape

• ‘Prods’ used by experimenter

Explain why there might have been EV’s that arose from the experimenters behaviour over time

• Hard to be a consistent actor over time/between conditions

• Perry found evidence of increased confidence/authority over time from experimenter

Explain reasons to think the study has good mundane realism

• involved an authority figure and subordinate (hierarchical relationship)

• Authority came from socially sanctioned role (uniform)

Explain reasons to think the study had bad mundane realism

• giving shocks for errors in learning is an unusual occurrence

• Reason for harming the learner isn’t really justified

Explain the procedure and results of Hofling’s study of obedience

• ‘Dr Smith’ (confederate) phoned nurses working alone on wards at different hospitals

• He instructed them to give a patient 20mg of ‘Astroten’ - which broke the hospital rules (overdose)

• 21/22 nurses obeyed the order

Explain the procedure and results of Bickman’s study of obedience to authority

• confederates dressed in jacket and tie/milkman’s outfit/security guard’s uniform

• Participants were 2x likely to obey the confederate in a uniform

Explain how Hofling and Bickman’s results are relevant to the ecological validity of Milgram’s study

• Bickman’s was a field experiment, which tests behaviour in a more realistic situation

• Both studies show that people will obey authority figures

• Even if it harms others (Hofling)

Explain 5 ways in which Milgram deceived participants

• the study was testing obedience not memory

• They were the participant, not the learner

• the learner was a confederate

• The draw for role as teacher or learner was rigged

• No shocks were given, the learners ‘responses’ were recordings

Explain how Milgram’s study can be criticised for lack of protection of participants

• participants experienced lengthy, high anxiety

• participants believed they were harming the ‘learner’

• the task was more stressful than everyday life

What year was the study?

1963

What was the aim of the Milgram Study?

To determine the extent to which people would obey an authority figure who instructed them to perform actions that conflicted with their personal conscience.

What was the procedure of the Milgram Study?

The procedure involved participants ("teachers") administering what they believed were electric shocks to a "learner" (a confederate) when the learner answered incorrectly.

What were the findings of the Milgram Study?

The key findings were that a surprising majority of participants (65%) would administer the highest voltage shock (450V), and most participants showed extreme signs of stress (such as trembling, nervous laughter), even while continuing to obey.

What are the conclusions from the Milgram Study?

The conclusion was that ordinary people are highly likely to obey orders from a legitimate authority, even if those orders involve harming another person. 

How many participants were there?

40 in the original study

Where did the study take place (not variation)

Yale University

What were the roles of the real participants?

“Teacher”- delivering the electric shocks

What were the roles of the confederates?

“Learner”- paid actors who intentionally got the answers wrong and faked the pain.

Were the participants deceived?

Yes, they were unaware of the confederates and the true aim of the study. Ethical Issue

Did the participants have the right to withdraw?

Technically yes, but if they tried to leave they were told that the experiment required them to stay. This pressured the participants and made them feel as if they couldn’t leave. Ethical Issue, Evaluative Ethical Weakness.

Did the Participants have informed consent?

No, they weren’t informed about the true purpose of the study and the confederates. Ethical Issue.

Obedience

A form of social influence in which an individual follows a direct order from an authority figure.

The Participants were deceived. Is this a strength or a weakness?

Both- Ethical Weakness and Methodological Strength

Strength or weakness? The experiment was repeated in a French documentary (Le Jeu de la Mort) about reality TV, and very similar results were found. 80% of participants delivered the fatal shock. The participants also exhibited the same nervous behaviour that Milgram found- nervous laughter, trembling, nail biting etc.

Methodological Strength- Replicability, more generalisable 

The study may appear to lack external validity as it was conducted in a lab, but the central feature of the study was the relationship between the authority figure and the participant. Milgram argued that the lab environment accurately reflected wider authority relationships in real life. One other research study found that 21/22 nurses obeyed unjustified by doctors on a hospital ward (until they were stopped). Strength or weakness?

Methodological Strength- Real world study

Proximity Variation procedure

Teacher and Learner in same room

Teacher forced the Learner’s hand onto a Shock Plate (Touch)

Experimenter gave instructions over the phone (remote)

What were the Proximity Variations findings?

Same room- Obedience dropped to 40%

Touch- Obedience dropped to 40%

Remote- Obedience dropped to 20.5%

What were the Proximity Variations Conclusions?

When a person is aware of, and can see the harm they are causing to another person, they are less obedient.

What were the Location Variations Procedure

Move the location of the study from the prestigious Yale University, to a run down office block.

What were the Location Variations Findings?

Obedience fell to 47.5%

What were the Locations Variations Conclusions?

The decrease is because the location is less prestigious, so has less legitimate authority.

Still high due to perceived scientific nature.