Miligram , obedience

Aim

To investigate how obident people are when an authority figure orders them to physically harm another person

Research method and design

• Laboratory Experimet

• Yale University, in a modern laboratory ( made procedure seem legitimate, animportant situational factor in obedience.)

  
  

Iv & DV

• No IV

• DV: (Observation through 1 way mirror)

  1. the maximum voltage given in response to the orders.

  2. participants' body language, any verbal comments or protests made throughout the procedure.

Sample

• volunteer sample

• newspaper advertisement

• 40 men

• aged bwteen 20-50 years

• New Haven, USA.

• range of different backgrounds and occupations

• $4.50 for taking part

Deception

• were told that the study was about memory and punishment.

• Both men were told that they would be allocated the roles of 'teacher' or 'learner'. (but it was fixed so that the real participant was always allocated the role of teacher)

• The participant was told that although the shocks were painful, they were not dangerous.

About Shocks

• 15 V to 450 V

• ordered to increase the level of shock each time by 15 V for each error the learner made.

• Until 300 V were reached, the learner had remained silent when receiving the punishment.

• The procedure was considered to be complete when theparticipant refused to give any more shocks, or when they had given the maximum 450 V available.

Prods

(Remember in sequence )

1. Please go on / Please continue

2. requires that you continue

3. It is absolutely essential that you continue

4. You have no other choice, you must go on.

Results

Debriefing

• each participant was interviewed

  • participants were asked to estimate how painful they thought the final 450 V shock was, on a scale of 0-14 ('not at all painful' to 'extremely painful').

  • mean estimate was 13.42 out of a maximum 14

• the deception was fully explained to them.

  • meet the learner again, in order to reassure them that the learner was uninjured.

Explanation for obedience:

situational Explanation for obedience:

1. perceived legitimacy of the study; the professional academic environment of the study

2. use of uniform by the experimenter ( a grey technician's coat)

• participants had been paid to participate so they felt obliged to continue.

• Participants also believed that both they and the learner had freely volunteered to participate.

Conclusion

Strenghts

• Controlled observation

• standardised Procudure (Prods)

• validity (example shock given to participants)

Weakness

• Low ecological Validity (Laborartory )

• Low generalisaibilty (all men)

• quantitative data, objectivity (the voltage of shocks delivered)

• qualitative data ( participants' physical and verbal behaviour as they administered the shock.)

Ethical Issues

• not protected from psychological harm ( distressed by their own behaviour)

• repeatedly deceived

• participants had consented to take part in the research, they did not give their informed consent.

Application to everyday life

Nature VS. Nuture

Individual Vs. Situational

Psychology being investigated

Background

Why In Social approach ?