Burger 2009 contemporary study

    Cards (19)

    • Burger aimed to see if Milgrams findings were era-bound and if obedience is affected by gender, personality traits and desire for personal control
    • Was his a volunteer sample ?

      Yes
    • His sample consisted of 70 adults aged 20 - 81 years
    • His sample had 29 men and 41 women
    • How did he recruit his sample ?
      Through distributing flyers at libraries, farmers markets, coffee shops and community centres - in newspapers and online
    • Who did burger employe to protect his participants ?
      6 ethical safeguards
    • Burger stopped at 150v whereas milgram stopped at 450vz, this is because burger belived that was 'the point of no return'
    • what did burger do to all participants before allowing them to continue with the study ?
      All participants had a 2 - step screening process to exclude volunteers who may react negatively to the experience
    • A mild 15v shock was given to participants compared to milgrams 45v shock - true or false ?

      True
    • Participants were given 3 chances to the right to withdraw, and twice in writing
    • What percentage of people pressed 150v ?
      70
    • burger only went to 150v to reduce distress
    • Conclusion - he found that milgrams findings were not era-bound
    • Was this experiment generalisable ?
      Yes - he used a representative sample, meaning it was diverse as he used a wide age range and both female and males
    • Was this experiment reliable ?
      Yes - it has test-retest reliability, they replicated milgrams script and filmed the experiment
    • Was this experiment useful ?
      Yes - it helps us to understand obedience, and that it is evolutionary as it remains similar over time
    • Was this experiment internally valid ?
      no - it was a volunteer sample which suggests that they all have similar personalities which can show similarities in samples
    • Was this experiment ecologically valid ?
      No - it had a laboratory setting which means the environment is unnatural, and participants were asked to perform a unrealistic task which wouldn't be asked of them in ordinary life.
    • Was this experiment ethical ?
      Yes - participants had 3 chances to withdraw , all participants were screened and excluded those who may react negatively to reduce harm and distress