Milgram study

• aim?

  see if volunteer participants are similarly obedient to inhumane orders.
• how were the participants collected?

  advertised to recruit 40 men with age range of 20- 50 in Connecticut. had mixed occupations and education levels and were payed $4 to go to Yale Uni.
• procedure?

  told that aim was how punishment affects learning, the study involves 1 teacher (1t) and 1 learner (1l) confederate was 1l. 1l was sat and sample shock of 45v was given to 1t for legitimacy. could hear but not see 1l, would read word pairs then 1st word along with 4 terms. if incorrect shock administrated at increasing level if wrong. pre set responses, 300v banging on wall 315v silence. interviewed after process using open q and attitude scale. procedures done to leave lab in state of wellbeing. friendly reconciliation after and most Ps still thought study was real.
• standardised prods?

  if asked for advice 4 prods used:

  • please continue
  • the experiment requires you to continue
  • it is absolutely essential you continue
  • you have no other choice, you must go on.

  asked about 1l, response was that must continue whether he likes it or not.

  asked about harm, response was that its painful but no permanent tissue damage.
• results?

  quantitative, 100% Ps continued to 300v. 14 stopped before 450v so in total 26/40 (65%) continued past 450v.

  qualitative, visible signs of distress (protest, twitch, laugh or sweat nervously). some said “its not fair for the poor guy” but some remained quiet throughout
• conclusions?

  • Yale is prestigious so unlikely for anything unethical to occur.
  • Ps volunteered so made commitment.
  • 300v, Ps seem willing.
  • new situation for Ps and unable to know what suitable behaviour is. (known as novel situation)
• evaluation?

  G, not representative and volunteer sample so same personality but mixed age and education

  R, lab so controlled setting, standardised prods and exp gave same instructions.

  A, can understand behaviour in WW2 and why people obey, should also show about challenging authority if inhumane.

  V, artificial so lacks MR but people feel tension so real raw responses. standardised and lab is similar to authority.

  E, !! no right to withdraw and deceiving but consent given and confidentiality is kept. did debrief shortly after but people are under impressions of immense pain
• variation 7?

  proximity. exp gave instruction in person but left room and explained rest over phone call. max v=22.5%, some even deceived and said they were administrating higher levels but weren’t.
• variation 10?

  setting. done in rundown office building in Bridgeport. “research associates of Bridgeport was private company and some questioned legitimacy. 47.5% went to max v so less reputable setting means less legitimacy
• variation 13?


  status. 2 confederates in this variation, 1 confederate kept track of time. exp went through instructions and left room w out explaining that he should administrate higher shock levels, but the confederate suggested that. 20% obedience.
• evaluation of variations?

  7, Ps may not have believed shocks weren’t real (V).

  10, mundane realism is good (eco v) set up however seems scientific and mundane realism is bad since shock generator and standard prods.

  13, shocks may not have been real (if reputable then protection of Ps) (V)

  Ps feel authority lay with Yale Uni.

  MAIN POINT, RESEARCH IS ANDOCENTRIC (focused on males) SO NO OBEDIENCE RATES FOR BOTH GENDER
• why did milgram introduce variations?

  wanted to investigate situational factors that may have affected Ps