situational variables

0.0(0)
studied byStudied by 0 people
0.0(0)
full-widthCall with Kai
learnLearn
examPractice Test
spaced repetitionSpaced Repetition
heart puzzleMatch
flashcardsFlashcards
GameKnowt Play
Card Sorting

1/19

encourage image

There's no tags or description

Looks like no tags are added yet.

Study Analytics
Name
Mastery
Learn
Test
Matching
Spaced
Call with Kai

No study sessions yet.

20 Terms

1
New cards

Procedure

  • The distance between the teacher and the learner/authority figure was changed (e.g. learner in same room, teacher forced learner’s hand onto shock plate).

2
New cards

Findings

  • Obedience decreased as proximity increased.
    For example, when the learner was in the same room, obedience dropped to about 40%; when physical contact was required, it dropped to about 30%.

3
New cards

Explanation

  • Being closer makes the consequences of actions more visible and increases empathy, making it harder to obey harmful orders.

4
New cards

  • The experiment was moved from Yale University to a run-down office building.

5
New cards

P

Strength = additional research support

6
New cards

E

Bickman (1974): confederate in three different outfits: jacket and tie, milkman and security guard. Stood in the street and ordered people to do small task

7
New cards

E

People were twice as likely to obey person dressed as security guard than dressed in jacket and tie

8
New cards

L

So, uniform has powerful effect on obediencE

9
New cards

P

Strength = cross-cultural research support

10
New cards

E

Meeus and Raaijmakers (1986): Dutch PPs ordered to say stressful things (e.g. insults) in job interview with confederate - variation where person giving orders not present in room

11
New cards

E

90% of PPs continued through the whole interview. However, when person giving orders not present, obedience greatly decreased.

12
New cards

L

So, Milgram’s findings not just limited to American males = external validity

13
New cards

P

Limitation = low internal validity

14
New cards

E

Orne and Holland (1968): Milgram’s procedure was unrealistic- even more relevant in situational variations.

15
New cards

E

Milgram agreed uniform variation was contrived so pps maybe worked out truth of experiment

16
New cards

L

So, PPs responding to demand characteristics in all Milgram’s findings

17
New cards

P

Limitation = serious social connotations

18
New cards

E

Mandel (1998): situational variable explanation offers ‘obedience alibi’

19
New cards

E

Ignore the role of dispositional factors in obedience - implies Nazis were victims of situational factors beyond their control

20
New cards

L

So, Milgram’s focus on situational variables may be offensive to Holocaust survivors