Milgram

• The structure of a background question e.g Outline the background of Milgram's study on obedience (4)

  1. define the key term/behaviour being investigated
  2. outline a previous historical event which inspired the researcher
  3. outline a previous study/theory which inspired the current study/theory
  4. explain how these background events inspired the current study
• Introduce that the study is on obedience, explain what authority figures are and how they influence obedience

  Milgram aimed to study obedience + was interested in how we respond to authority figures. we know that we are socialised to obey certain people who are seen as legitimate authority figures as we believe there will be significant consequences if we don't
• Explain how the holocaust inspired Milgram

  milgram was inspired by the atrocities of the holocaust in WW2 and how soldiers obeyed authority figures blindly regardless of their orders. for example, millions of innocent people were killed on command by the Nazi's during Hitler's regime.
• Outline agency theory and how that can lead to obedience

  This example of obedience highlighted the ability of people to move into an agent state recognising the need to obey + giving up their own freewill believing the authority figure will take responsibility for their behaviour.
• End with how Milgram was inspired by the Germans are different theory

  Events such as WW2/the holocaust prompted the 'Germans are different theory' stating that Germans are by disposition more obedient and more likely to follow orders prompting Milgram to conduct research to test this through the use of American men.
• What must be included in a background question on Milgram

  -talk about the authority figure taking responsibility for their actions when discussing agency theory

  -American men
• What was the aim of Milgram's study

  to investigate what level of obedience would be shown when participants were told by an (legitimate) authority figure to deliver/administrate electric shocks to another person

  USE "obedience" and "authority figure" AS CONTEXT IN Qs
• Sample used

  40 males

  aged between 20 + 50 years

  from New Haven (America)

  had a wide range of occupations
• Sampling method used


  VOLUNTEER

  • asked to participate in a study of memory + learning at Yale (prestigious, more likely to obey) = deception = reduces risk of DCs = high IV
  • Ps were paid $4.50 for showing up at lab = more inclined to obey
  • obtained by newspaper advertisements + direct mail solicitation
• Outline one way in which the sample shows sampling bias (3)

  P = only uses men from one culture making it ethnocentric

  E = only uses 40 men from New Haven in America, where obedience levels may be higher due to strict laws

  C = cannot generalise findings to men from other cultures (TP) where obedience rates may differ
• Other strengths + weakness of sampling method

  +all men means representative of TP (Nazi soldiers)

  +wide range of occupations

  -volunteer bias (weakness of volunteer sampling)
• The 2 confederates (actors in research) in the study

  1. the role of the experimenter = Jack Williams. wore a white lab coat + appeared stern + emotionless
  2. the victim/learner (person being shocked) = Mr Wallace. mild-mannered + likeable
• Summary of the agency theory

  suggests we shift between 2 diff states + behave diff in diff social contexts

  • autonomous state = in this state majority of time, choose to act how we like using our own freewill + take full responsibility for the consequences of our behaviour
  • agentic state = state of obedience, act as an agent of the legitimate authority figure + believe the authority figure will take all responsibility for our actions when in this state/situation
• The apparatus/materials

  created a fake 'shock generator' which had 30 switches marked clearly in 15 volt increments from 15 to 450 volts
• Research method


  • controlled observation -> artificial setting (lab at Yale university, Ps observed through one way mirrors, a fake shock generator)
  • data was gathered through observations made by the experimenter in the room w Ps + others who observed process through a one way mirror
  • most sessions were recorded on a magnetic tape, occasional photographs were taken through the one way mirrors + notes were made on unusual behaviours
• What was the estimated result of the observation

  prior to the study 14 Yale students, all psychology majors, estimated the % of Ps who would administrate the highest level of shock. they were provided with a detailed description of the experimental situation + instructed to plot the distribution of obedience of "100 Americans of diverse occupations and ranging in age from 20 to 50 years". estimates ranged from 1%-3% (mean 1.2%).
• Example Q: Explain how the research method was used in Milgram's (1963) study of obedience

  
• Procedure = last flashcard
• 2 controls in Milgram's study

  • Ps observed through one way mirror for their responses to an authority figure -> controls observer effects as if men knew they were being observed may not have been so obedient
  • Ps weren't told true aim -> control for demand characteristics as may have been less obedient if they knew their obedience levels were being investigated
  • Milgram wasn't role of experimenter -> reduced observer effects
• Quantitative data -> easy to compare = high external reliability

  considerable agreement between 14 Yale seniors that only a significant minority would go through to the end of the shock series however

  • 100% (all 40) shocked up to 300 volts
  • 65% (26) obeyed + gave shocks up to 450 volts

  therefore 26 Ps were obedient, 14 disobedient/defiant
• Qualitative data -> more insight into obedience = increased IV

  • many Ps showed signs of nervousness + tension, they sweated, trembled, stuttered, bit their lips, groaned, dug fingernails into their flesh + these were typical not exceptional responses
  • a common sign of tension was nervous laughing fits (14/40 Ps) which seemed entirely out of place + even bizarre
  • comments made by Ps such as "Oh I can't go on with this; no this isn't right. This is crazy. The guy is suffering in there" were recorded
  • full blown uncontrollable seizures were observed for 3 Ps
• Conclusion

  • theres no such thing as an obedient person + in the right (or wrong) situation we will enter an agentic state + obey orders
  • inhumane acts can be done by ordinary people there4 Germans aren't different
  • people will obey others whom they consider legitimate authority figures even if what they're asked goes against their moral beliefs
  • people obey because certain situational factors cause them to give up their sense of autonomy + become an agent of an authority figure
  • indv diffs such as personality influence the extent to which people will be obedient
• Example: outline one conclusion from Milgrams study of obedience

  one conclusion is that the majority of participants (65%) obeyed in response to an unethical request. this suggests that when in the presence of authority we give up our autonomy and blindly obey requests of an authority figure
• What to include in a theme question

  what = the aim/what they studied

  who = 2/3 features of the sample

  how = brief procedural detail

  finding/link = how the main finding links to the key theme
• Example Q: Explain how Milgram's study of obedience links to the key theme of responses to people in authority

  
• Example Q: Outline how Milgram's study of obedience links to the social approach

  
• Procedure Q pt 1

  
• Procedure Q pt2

  
• Milgrams possible explanations for high levels of obedience shown by Ps

  1. study carried out in lab at Yale Uni - a prestigious location there4 people felt the need to obey due to status of setting (+ wouldn't think unethical behaviour/studies would occur giving the study credibility)
  2. Jack Williams wore lab coat + appeared stern + authoritative - people think they should obey him
  3. Ps were in an adjacent room to Mr Wallace so couldn't see the learner = less real/serious as Ps couldn't see the pain they were inflicting
  4. Ps were paid $4.50 so feel more obliged to obey
• Evaluation

  
• Debates Milgram links to

  • Reductionism = reduces obedience to single situational factors such as the social environment of Yale University + the presence of the authority figure Jack Williams, ignoring individual differences
  • ethics = exposes men to harm - sweating, trembling seizures etc. deception = false aim, tells Ps its a study into memory + learning. informed consent = given false aim/dk true aim. aren't given RTW
• Procedure