Burger (2009)

Aim

To investigate if Milgram findings on obedience can be replicated with modern participants

Sample - AO1

• 70 pp (29 male & 41 female), aged 20–81, volunteer sample, recruited via newspaper advert

• Paid $50.

Sample - AO3

• Good population validity because of its large sample, age range and use of males and females

• Volunteer sample may introduce bias, individuals willing to participate in psychological research may differ in obedience levels from general pop

• Ethnocentric - conducted in USA, cultural differences

Procedure - AO1

• pp assigned role of teacher & instructed to administer electric shock to a learner for incorrect answers in memory test

• shocks increased in 15v intervals to 450v but once they reached 150v they were stopped

• this was the baseline condition where it was concluded that 150v was the “point of no return”

• Milgram standardised verbal prompts such as “you must go on”

• all pp also got to experience a sample shock

Procedure - AO3

• Internal reliability - standardised procedure, all pp felt shock and used shock generator going up in 15v to 150v

• External reliability - standardised procedure makes study easily replicable & consistent results

• Supported by similarity in findings to Milgram, strengthening reliability of obedience research over time

• Interrater reliability - study was also filmed so other people can judge the obedience too - removed experimenter bias

Methodology - AO1

• used laboratory experiment in university setting, closely replicating, including electric shock & prompts

• 150v point of no return was created as Milgram found those who reached this level were likely to continue

• pp’s screened - people who knew Milgram’s study, studied psych or had clinical/psych issues were removed & they had clinical psychologist interview

Methodology - AO3

• High internal validity - lab experiment cant be affected by extraneous variables

• Low external validity - low mundane realism & ecological validity

• 150v “point of no return” may be invalid as some may have dropped out at 165v, lowering internal validity

• screening - improved internal validity bc it reduces participant variables, meaning differences in obedience are more likely to be caused by IV rather than individual differences

Results - AO1

found 70% pp willing to continue past 150v, similar to Milgram, pp showed stress like hesitation, gender & empathy had no sig diff, LOC - ↑ ILOC were more likely to stop at or before 150v

Results - AO3

• obedience to authority has remained consistent over time, supporting Milgram's conclusions & demonstrating temporal reliability

• applied to modern institutions such as workplace or healthcare, where people may obey AF even when they feel uncomfortable doing so

• testing for LOC might identify if they are obedient or not