Obedience

• What is obedience defined as in the study material?

  To comply with authority demands
• What was the aim of Milgram's 1963 study?

  To investigate obedience involving harm to others
• How many American male volunteers participated in Milgram's study?

  40 volunteers
• Where did Milgram's experiment take place?

  Yale University
• What did the participants believe the experiment was testing?

  A test on memory
• Who was always assigned as the Teacher in the experiment?

  The participant was always the Teacher
• What role did the confederate play in the experiment?

  The Learner
• What was the Teacher instructed to do after each incorrect answer?

  To punish the Learner with a shock
• What happened when the Teacher showed reluctance to continue?

  They were encouraged to continue
• What voltage did all participants reach in the study?

  300V
• What percentage of participants went up to the maximum voltage?

  65%
• What type of research supported Milgram's findings?

  Research Support from a French documentary
• What was the outcome of the French documentary related to Milgram's study?

  80% delivered maximum shock of 460V
• What did Sheridan & King (1972) study involve?

  Participants giving real shocks to a puppy
• What percentage of men gave what they thought was a fatal shock in Sheridan & King's study?

  54%
• What percentage of women gave what they thought was a fatal shock in Sheridan & King's study?

  100%
• What does the low internal validity refer to in Milgram's study?

  Participants doubted the shocks were real
• What did Orne & Holland (1986) argue about Milgram's participants?

  They were play-acting due to disbelief
• What did Perry (2013) find when listening to Milgram's tapes?

  Only half believed the shocks were real
• What alternative interpretation did Haslam et al (2014) provide for Milgram's findings?

  Obedience linked to scientific identity
• What did Haslam et al (2014) observe about participants' obedience?

  They disobeyed when told to blindly obey
• What are the key findings and evaluations of Milgram's study on obedience?

  • 65% of participants reached 450V
  • Supported by French documentary findings
  • Sheridan & King showed real shock obedience
  • Low internal validity concerns raised
  • Alternative interpretations by Haslam et al
• What are the implications of Milgram's findings on obedience to authority?

  • Highlights human tendency to obey authority
  • Raises ethical concerns in psychological research
  • Suggests need for awareness of authority influence
• AO3 - What is a strength for Milgram’s Research?

  Research Support

  • Milgram’s findings were replicated in a French documentary in which the participants in the game were paid to give fake electric shocks by the presenter to other participants who were actually actors
  • 80% of the participants delivered the maximum shock of 460V to an apparently unconscious man and their behaviour was almost identical to that of Milgram’s participants
  • This supports Milgram’s original findings about obedience to authority, and demonstrates that the findings were not just due to special circumstances
• AO3 - What is a strengths for Milgram’s Research?

  Further Research Support

  • Sheridan & King (1972) conducted a study using a procedure like Milgram’s in which participants gave real shocks to a puppy in response to orders from an experimenter
  • Despite the real distress of the animal, 54% of the men and 100% of the women gave what they thought was a fatal shock
  • This suggests that the effects in Milgram’s study were genuine because people behaved obediently even when the shocks were real
• AO3 - What is a limitation for Milgram’s Research?

  Low Internal Validity

  • Milgram reported that 75% of his participants said they believed the shocks were genuine
  • Orne & Holland (1986) argued that participants behaved as they did because they didn’t believe in the set up so they were play-acting and Perry (2013) listened to the tapes of Milgram’s experiments and reported only ½ of them believed the shocks were real
  • This suggests that the participants may have been responding to demand characteristics, trying to fulfill the aims of the study
• AO3 - What is a limitation for Milgram’s Research?

  Alternative Interpretation to Findings

  • Haslam et al (2014) showed that Milgram’s participants obeyed when the Experimenter delivered verbal prods but when told that they have no other choice but to go on, they disobeyed without exception
  • According to Social Identity Theory, participants in Milgram’s study only obeyed when they identified with the scientific aims of the research but when told to blindly obey an authority figure, they refused
  • This shows that Social Identity Theory may provide a more valid interpretation of Milgram’s findings