SI Studies: Milgram

AO1:

- Milgram 

- Sample of 40 male ppts at Yale university 

- One person was allocated the role of learner, the other the role as teacher (which was always the ppts role)

- Teacher had to read questions and each time the learner made a mistake the ppt would give them an electric shock. 

- These went up to 450 volts. 

- Learner would scream, but experimenter would give prods instructing the ppts to continue “The experiment requires that you continue”.

Findings 

- 65% of people continued until the full 450 volts was reached. 

- He concluded that under the right circumstances ordinary people will obey unjust orders.

AO3:

P = Low ecological validity

E = took place in an artificial setting but it did have high control so less extraneous variables

E = high reliability.

P = Sample was unrepresentative 

E = white american students

E =2.718 both culturally and gender bias

L = unrepresentative and lacks population validity

P =  research support 

E = Sheridan and King (1972) conducted a similar study where real shocks were given to a puppy.

E = Despite the real shocks, 54% of the male student participants and 100% of the females delivered what they thought was a fatal shock.

L =  This suggests that the effects in Milgram's study were genuine

Ethical issues = deception and protection from harm!

P = Orne and Holland's criticism of Milgram's original study

E = was that many of the participants worked out that the procedure was faked.

E = It is even more likely that participants in Milgram's variations realised this because of the extra manipulation.

L = suggests a low validity and reliability of data