Form of social influence where a person follows a direct order. The person issuing order is most likely a figure of authority who has power to punish lack of obedience
What did Milgram want to understand?
Understand why Germans followed Hitler's orders and if Germans were more obedient
What was Milgram's aim?
To see if ordinary Americans would obey unjust orders from a perceived authority figure
Who were the pps?
40male students (volunteer sample) and were told the study was on role of punishment in learning
What was Milgram's method?
Pps drew straws to decide roles - confederate, 47 yr old Mr Wallace was always the learner and the true pps was always the teacher
Learner would learn word pairs and teacher would give an electric shock for wrong answer
Learner was strapped to shock generator and teacher sat in adjacent room with shock machine (15v-450v in 15v increments)
True pps was given small shock to show feeling
Mr Wallace mentioned heart problem
What were the prompts used if the teacher objected?
'Please continue' or 'please go on'
'the experiment requires that you continue'
'it is absolutely essential that you continue'
'you have no other choice, you must go on'
The researcher also said that the fault would be on him and they would not suffer consequences
What was the expected result?
As intelligent men, no more than 3% would reach 450v
What were the baseline findings?
No pps stopped before 300v
12.5% stopped at 300v(5pps)
65% of pps continued till 450v - showing extreme tension, sweating
What was the conclusion?
Obedience to authority is in human nature and people will obey orders that go against conscience in certain situations
What were the variations of Milgram's study?
Changeofvenue to rundown building = 47.5% to 450v (decrease in conformity)
Teacher and learner in sameroom = 40% to 450v (decrease)
Teacher paired with confederateassistant who pressesswitches = 92.5% to 450v (increase)
Teacher has to forcelearner'shand on shockplate = 30% to 450v (decrease)
What were the weaknesses of Milgram's study?
No informed consent (could have been dealt with by gaining presumptive consent)
No protection from harm as pps had signs of distress and after experiment knew they were willing to deliver lethal shocks
Deception
Experimental validity - Orne and Holland (1996) argued pps knew they weren't giving out real shocks and went along to please experimenter (demand characteristics)
Milgram said in post-experiment questionnaires pps believed real shocks were given