Milgram

Social Approach

Social Approach

looks at the role of the social situation and how it affects both behaviors and thought processes

social pressure

(Psychology)

pressure to conform with social standards or norms

obedience

(Psychology)

following the directive of an authority figure

autonomous state

(Psychology)

maintaining a sense of free will

agentic state

(Psychology)

give up free will and become an agent of authority; don’t question the order and believe that the authority figure is responsible

ex | from a young age, people are taught (1) to respect authority and (2) to not hurt people intentionally

the Holocaust

(Background)

Adolf Eichmann, who architected the Holocaust was put on trial, and when questioned as to why he did it, he stated “I was just following orders.” Many other Nazis echoed the same sentiment, and so it was believed that Germans were predisposed to being obedient

Milgram

(Background)

• believed that the rest of the world would be autonomous

• was interested in destructive obedience - following orders that are harmful in nature, and are carried out with the intention that it will destroy something / cause harm

Aim #1

To investigate how obedient people would be when ordered by an authority figure to cause harm or pain to another person

Aim #2

To see how large of an electric shock a participant would give a helpless man when ordered to do so

Hypothesis #1

To test that obeying orders to kill another human being was a one-off that would never happen again

Hypothesis #2

U.S. citizens would not obey the command to give an electric shock

IV

none

DV

obedience - percentage people shocked at each level

Method

• no design because there is no IV

• data collected in observation and interview

shock generator

(Apparatus)

moves up in 15 volt increments, 15 is label ‘slight shock’ and 450 is labeled ‘Danger: Severe shock’

Participants

40 men aged 20 to 50 years old volunteer sampled from New Haven, Connecticut via newspaper ad; paid $4.00 plus $0.50 carfare; 37.5% blue collar, 40% white collar, and 22.5% professionals

Mr. Williams

(Experimenters)

30 year old high school biology teacher acting as the experimenter, wearing a gray coat and horn-rimmed glasses, carrying a clipboard

Mr. Wallace

(Experimenters)

47 year old accountant acting as the learner

Control #1

Everyone is told the same thing at the beginning of the study

Control #2

The experimenter will always give the same prods in the same order

Control #3

Mr. Wallace will always give the same complaints at the same places throughout the study

Control #4

The word pairs will always be given the same way in the same order

Step 1

(Procedure)

When the teacher enters the room, the experimenter will explain the study to both the teacher and the learner, and the participant will be deceived into thinking it’s about using physical punishment to improve learning and memory

Step 2

(Procedure)

To pick roles, two slips of paper that both say “teacher,” are placed into a hat. Mr. Wallace always goes first, and he lies and says “learner” every time

Step 3

(Procedure)

The experimenter will take the teacher and learner into the secondary room where the shock will be received

Step 4

(Procedure)

The teacher is quickly hooked up to the machine and given a 45 volt shock to show the machine works, and then the machine is turned off

Step 5

(Procedure)

Mr. Wallace is hooked up to the generator and the experiment begins

Step 6

(Procedure)

The teacher will read a pair of words and the learner is supposed to push a button for the first word that was given in the list. If Mr. Wallace gets it right, they move on to the next pair of words. If he gets it wrong, he will be shocked with 15 volts, and every wrong answer after will increase the shock by another 15 volts

Step 7

(Procedure)

At certain predetermined points, Mr. Wallace will complain. At 75 volts, he says “Hey, this hurts.” At 300 volts, he pounds on the door and says he wants out of there

Step 8

(Procedure)

If at any point the experimenter thinks the teacher won’t shock Mr. Wallace, he will give a prod

Prod 1

Please go on

Prod 2

The experiment requires that you continue

Prod 3

It is absolutely essential that you go on

Prod 4

You have no choice, you must go on

Step 9

(Procedure)

The experiment ends if they reach 450 volts or the teacher receives all 4 prods and pauses a 5th time

Step 10

(Procedure)

The participant will complete an interview with Milgram, in which he asks how painful they think the last few shocks were on a scale of 0 to 14

Step 11

(Procedure)

Participants are debriefed and told the true purpose

qualitative data

• nonverbal - looks, sweating, agitation, etc.

• quotes during experiment

• interviews

quantitative data

shock levels

Finding #1

All 40 participants shocked someone up to 285 volts. 5 people stop at 300 volts, 4 people at 315, 2 people at 330, 1 person at 345, 1 person at 360 and 1 person at 375. 26 people made it to 450 volts

Finding #2

Milgram observed that participants were distressed in that they exhibited nervous behavior such as sweating and trembling. 3 people got seizures, 1 of which was severe

Finding #3

For the interviews, Milgram found that most people were happy they participated in the experiment, and they believed that it was a real situation. The average pain estimate was 13.42

Finding #4

Milgram was surprised to learn that obedience is strong and that the procedure caused high tension in the participants

Conclusion #1

The Germans are no different from those in other countries

Conclusion #2

Although people obeyed, they weren’t happy doing it

Conclusion #3

People were more obedient than the survey showed

Conclusion #4

This supports the situational hypothesis and eliminates the individual one

Conclusion #5

The situation triggered a conflict between obeying orders and not harming others

Ethics

Informed consent was gained but with use of deception. Confidentiality was maintained. Protection from harm was violated in the psychological and emotional stress of participants, and the removal of the right to withdraw. Debriefing did occur, and Milgram did a follow-up 6 months after to assess the psychological states of participants.

Strength #1

Both types of data were collected, allowing for statistical comparison and explanation behind results

Strength #2

The sample is large and diverse in terms of profession, allowing for generalization

Strength #3

The use of stooges means that Milgram doesn’t have to be in the room during the experiment, eliminating demand characteristics

Strength #4

The interview at the end allows Milgram to assess the thoughts participants had during the experiment

Weakness #1

The sample is only male, making generalization difficult

Weakness #2

Participants are being paid, so they may feel more pressure to finish out the experiment, and they are only from one city, creating geographical bias

Weakness #3

Participants were psychologically and emotionally tortured, which is an extreme violation of protection from harm

Individual v. Situational

(issues & debates)

Since the sample has varying professions, the individual hypothesis is eliminated, and obedience is caused by being placed in a situation with orders being given

Application

(issues & debates)

• to understanding destructive obedience

• to explaining genocide

Rule #1 for Obedience

Authority figure must be seen as legitimate and must be close

Mr. Williams wore glasses and lab coat and is near participant when giving prods

Rule #2 for Obedience

Authority figure must be supported by prestigious institution

Yale University

Rule #3 for Obedience

The victim is depersonalized and distanced

Mr. Wallace is referred to as “the learner” and is put behind a wall

Rule #4 for Obedience

No role models of defiance

It’s just the experimenter and participant in the room