situational variables- obedience

Why did milgram test the effect of situational factors?

He wanted to further explore situational factors that influence obedience, recreated his experiment with 18 variations. Identified factors affecting obedience- proximity, location and uniform.

How did milgram investigate the effect of proximity on obedience?

Milgram argued that obedience to authority could be decreased by increasing the proximity of the learner to the participant. If the pain was obvious, they would be less likely to administer the electric shocks.

Lack of proximity to experimenter also led to a drop in obedience. When experimenter issued orders over the phone, obedience decreased.

-when the learner could not be seen or heard obedience increased to 66%

-when the teacher and learner were in the same room obedience fell to 40%

-when the teacher had to force the learner’s hand onto a shock plate obedience dropped to 30%

How did milgram investigate the effect of location on obedience?

The location of the experiment in Yale may have contributed to high obedience levels as the location gave the experimenter social power as a legitimate authority. Importance of location is supported by the reduced obedience rates when the study was moved to a rundown building in Bridgeport- dropped to 47.5%

Milgram also did it in a basement at Yale, but it had little effect as the students still knew it was at Yale.

How did milgram investigate the effect of uniform on obedience?

People are more likely to be obedient when ordered to do something by someone in uniform as it confers legitimate authority on the individual, told to do what is ordered by someone of legitimate authority.

In milgram’s experiments the experimenter wore a white coat, gave scientific authority, increased obedience.

Milgram tested as experimenter was called away, replaced by ordinary man, dropped obedience to 20%.

What are the positives of situational variables?

-BICKMAN showed the importance of uniform. In New York, 3 male experiments dressed up in smart clothes, one as a milkman, and one as a security guard and gave orders to pedestrians. Participants were more likely to obey the guard, than the civilian and milkman. Obedience depends on perceived authority.

What are the negatives of situational variables?

-HOFLING- legitimacy of authority overrides other factors as by changing the uniform, he lost the scientific expertise and credibility of an experimenter. The change of location undermines the experimenter’s authority and credibility. In hoflings study over the phone with the nurses, the legitimacy of the setting overrides the effect of proximity.

-ORNE and Holland said that many participants realised the procedure was fake, even more likely in variations due to extra manipulation- force hand onto shock plate

-ELMS and MILGRAM overstated the effect of situational factors. Link between F scale and obedience shows authoritarian personality causes obedience. Interview post experiment compared 20 defiant vs obedient participants, fully obedient participants scored higher on authoritarian tests and admired experimenters.

-MANDEL says that the research gives and excuse for war crimes, offensive to holocaust victims