Obedience

• What was Milgram’s original method?

  • 40 male volunteers were given the role of teacher and confederates were given role of learner
  • The participant was told to deliver shocks becoming more intense (15-450 volts) by a professor in a lab coat when the learner answered incorrectly
• What were the findings of Milgram’s baseline study (1963)?

  Participants were distressed but obeyed

  • 100% went to 300 volts
  • 12.5% stopped at 300 volts
  • 65% went to full 450 volts

  If the participant resisted the professor encouraged them to continue with prompts
• What are 3 ethical criticisms of Milgram’s study?

  • Lacked protection from harm- caused unnatural distress
  • Included deception- no informed consent
  • Lacked the right to withdraw from the study
• How does Hofling’s (1966) research support Milgram?

  Hofling (1966)

  • 21/22 real nurses obeyed “DR Smith’s” phone call order to give double the maximum dose of an unfamiliar drug
  • This was a field study with a familiar task so it had high ecological validity and mundane realism
• How does Bickman’s (1974) research support Milgram?

  Bickman (1974)

  • demonstrated obedience to authority in the real world using a field study
  • 39% of the public would pick up litter if asked by an investigator dressed as a security guard
  • But only 14% would obey it the person was dressed as a milkman
• Milgram’s (1963) baseline obedience study- Procedure

  40 male American participants told they were taking part in a study on memory

  Each participant arrived at the lab and drew their role

  A confederate was always the learner, the participant was the teacher and there was an experimenter who wore a lab coat.

  Laerner had to learn word pairs and teacher delivered shock when they were wrong by pressing switches from slight to severe shocks

  Shocks increased in 15 volt steps to 450 volts

  if teacher wanted to stop the experimenter gave a verbal prod
• what were the verbal prods?

  Prod 1- “Please continue” or “Please go on”

  Prod 2- “The experiment requires that you continue”

  Prod 3- “It is absolutely essential that you continue”

  Prod 4- “You have no other choice, you must go on”
• Milgram (1963) baseline obedience study- Findings

  12.5% participants stopped at 300 volts

  65% continued to the highest level of 450 volts

  Participants showed signs of extreme tension- 3 had full blown uncontrollable seizures

  Before the study 14 psychology students predicted that in more than 3% would continue to 450 volts- so the baseline findings were unexpected

  84% of participants were glad they participated
• Milgram (1963) baseline obedience study- Conclusions

  We obey legitimate authority even if it means that our behaviour causes someone else harm.

  Certain situational factors encourage obedience
• Findings have been replicated- A03

  In a French TV game show, contestants were paid to give electric shocks when ordered by the presenter.

  • 80% gave the maximum 460 volts to an apparently unconscious man
  • their behaviour was like that of Milgram’s participants

  this supports Milgram’s original findings about obedience
• Low internal validity- A03

  Orne and Holland (1968)

  • argue that participanst guessed the electric shocks were fake and so they were just play acting

  this was supported by perry’s discovery that only half the participants believed the shocks were real

  suggests that participants may have been responding to demand characteristics
• Research support- A03

  Sheridan and King (1972)

  • participants gave real shocks to a puppy
  • 54% of males and 100% of females delivered what they thought was a fatal shock

  Suggests the obedience in Milgram’s study is genuine
• Findings not due to blind obedience- A03

  Haslam et al. (2014)

  • found that every participant given the first 3 prods obeyed the experimenter but those given the 4th disobeyed

  According to SIT the first 3 prods required identification with the science of the research by the 4th prod required blind obedience

  This shows that the findings are best explained in terms of identification with scientific aims and not as blind obedience to authority
• Ethical issues- A03

  Deception

  • participants thought the shocks were real
  • dealt with in debrief

  Baumrind (1964)

  • felt this deception could have serious consequences for participants and researchers e.g. no informed consent

  So research can damage the reputations of psychologists and their research in the eyes of the public
• Perry’s research

  Perry (2013) analysed Milgram’s archive tape recordings

  she made several discoveries undermining the validity of Milgram’s findings and conclusions, like:

  • The experimenter frequently went off script like by varying the wording of the 4 prods and using them excessively
  • Participants often voiced their suspicions about the shocks which made Perry conclude that most participants realised the shocks were fake