Obedience: Milgram's research

What is obedience?

A form of social influence in which an individual follows a direct order. The person issuing the order is usually a figure of authority, who has the power to punish when obedient behaviour is not forthcoming.

What study did Milgram set up?

A baseline procedure that could be used to assess obedience levels. This procedure was adapted in later variations by Milgram and the baseline findings were used to make comparisons.

What is the baseline procedure of Milgram’s study?

40 American males volunteered to take part in a study at Yale University, supposedly on memory

• When each volunteer arrived at Milgram’s laboratory, they were introduced to another participant (who was a confederate)

• Each volunteer was allocated the role of ‘teacher’ seemingly at random, however the experiment was set up so the volunteer was always the ‘teacher’ (fixed)

• The confederate was the ‘learner’

• There was also an ‘experimenter’ (another confederate) who was the legitimate authority figure, dressed in a lab coat

What was the aim of Milgram’s study?

To assess obedience in a situation where an authority figure (experimenter) ordered the participant (teacher) to give an increasingly strong shock to the learner located in a different room (in 15 volt steps up to 450 volts). The shocks were fake, but the teacher didn’t know this.

When did Milgram’s study end?

The experiment continued until either the participant refused to continue, or the maximum shock level of 450 volts was reached. If the teacher tried to stop the experiment, the experiment would respond with a series of standardised verbal prods, for example: ‘the experiment requires that you continue’ and ‘it is absolutely essential that you continue’.

What were the findings of Milgram’s baseline study?

Every participant delivered all the shocks up to 300 volts.

• 12.5% (five participants) stopped at 300 volts (‘intense shock’)

• 65% continued to the highest level of 450 volts, i.e. they were fully obedient

Milgram also collected qualitative data, including observations that the participants showed signs of extreme tension; many of them were seen to ‘sweat, tremble, stutter, bite their lips, groan, and dig their fingernails into their hands’; three even had ‘full-blown uncontrollable seizures’.

What did Milgram do before carrying out the study?

He asked psychology students to predict the participants behaviour

• The students estimated that no more than 3% of participants would continue up to 450 volts.

• Showing that the findings were unexpected as the students underestimated how obedient people actually are.

What did Milgram do after carrying out the study?

He debriefed all participants in the baseline study and assured them that their behaviour was entirely normal and similar to others, to reduce feelings of guilt and psychological distress.

What did Milgram conclude from his study in obedience?

He concluded that people are willing to obey a legitimate authority figure, to the extent to which they might harm another person. He suspected that there were certain factors in the situation that encouraged obedience, so decided to conduct further studies to investigate this.

What are the strengths of Milgram’s study on obedience?

It had been replicated many times = high external validity

• Burger (2009) used an ethical “obedience lite” version of the procedure, stopping participants at 150 volts.

• Grzyb et al. (2023) found that 90% of participants continued to 150 volts, supporting Milgram's finding of high obedience.

• This suggests that high obedience is not unique to Milgram's original study, strengthening the validity of his findings.

How is low internal validity a limitation of Milgram’s study on obedience?

It may not have tested what he intended to test

• Orne & Holland (1968) argued that participants may not have believed the shocks were real, meaning they were “play-acting” rather than genuinely obeying.

• Perry (2013) found that only about half of participants appeared to believe the shocks were real; two-thirds of these disobeyed.

• This suggests participants may have responded to demand characteristics, so Milgram may not have been measuring genuine obedience to authority.

What is a counterpoint to Milgram’s study having low internal validity?

Sheridan & King (1972) found high obedience even when participants gave real shocks to a puppy: 54% of males and 100% of females gave what they believed was a fatal shock. This suggests Milgram's findings reflected genuine obedience, rather than participants simply believing the shocks were fake.

How does Milgram’s study lack external validity?

The study had low ecological validity because the laboratory setting and task were highly artificial. In real life, we usually obey less extreme/harmless instructions rather than orders to give severe electric shocks.

Therefore, the findings may not generalise to real-life situations of obedience.

What is a counterpoint to the claim that Milgram’s study lacks external validity?

Milgram argued that the laboratory can reflect wider authority relationships found in real life.

• Hofling et al. (1966) found that 21 out of 22 nurses obeyed an unjustified instruction from a doctor in a real hospital setting.

• This suggests that the processes of obedience to authority observed by Milgram tell us something valuable about how obedience operates in real life, supporting the generalisability of his findings.