milgram

• Milgram studied obedience but told participants it was the effect of punishment on learning
• aim: to investigate obedience to an authority figure using a laboratory-based experiment.
• sample of 40 American men responded to an ad.

  • gender bias
  • personality: they are more likely to listen as they respond to the ad and want to take part
• 1. Mr. Wallace, Ps, and the experimenter (in a grey lab coat) are in a room and get 'randomly allocated to either 'learner' or 'teacher'. Mr Wallace is always a learner.
  2. The experimenter explained all the punishments: with each wrong answer, the teacher would administer the learner a shock, increasing by 15 volts. The PS was given a shock of 45 volts.
• 3. ps then read out a set of word association tasks and get a set of pre-recorded answers in return and with each wrong answer, a shock is given.

  4. at 150 volts, the learner (Mr wallace) began complaining saying he wanted to leave. at 300 volts he said he had heart problems and refused to answer. at 315 volts he screamed loudly and at 330 volts went quiet. if the teacher was reluctant, they were given verbal prompts and were told it would not leave any lasting impacts and to keep shocking even if he went quiet.
• the verbal prompts were:

  'the experiment requires you to continue'

  'you have no choice'
• main version - the obedience rate was 62.5%
• application:

  was hoped that this study would help stop people blindly obeying orders, but through history, we can see nothing has changed.

  ,
• results:

  clearly, the idea that all Germans obey and others don't is wrong - as ps were American

  shows that obeying hierarchal structures is normal
• why did he carry it out?

  after Nazi Germany, soldiers were using the excuse that their boss told them to do it

  test the 'germans are different' hypothesis - without the highly obedient nature of germans, hitler would have not succeeded.
• the 4 main sub-studies carried out:

  1. changing location to a run down office block
  2. proximity of learner
  3. proximity of experimenter
  4. clothing
• location change showed lower obedience rates. the original experiment was done at Yale.
• learner proxmity showed 20% obedience when the teacher had to physically press the electric pad onto the learner
• experimenter proximity showed less obedience where they were in a separate room - where teachers could lie about the volts, they did
• the experiment was meant as a pilot study.
• evaluation:

  • there is no IV so it cannot be considered an experiment, more of an observation
  • no practical application
  • only external actions can be measured - thought processes cannot
  • lack of informed consent
  • psychological harm was inflicted
• the voltage went from 15 volts to 450 volts
• next to 450 volts it said 'XXX'
• 4 main ethical guidelines he broke:

  • informed consent
  • deception
  • protection from harm
  • right to withdraw