AO3

• A strength is that Hofling et al. (1966) ​studied nurses on a hospital ward.

  -Nurses were contacted by phone and ordered to administer a dose of an unauthorised drug that was two times higher than that labelled on the maximum safe dosage. ​

  -21 out of 22 nurses obeyed (95%)

  -This suggests that the processes of obedience to authority that occurred in Milgram’s study can be generalised to other situations.
• A weakness is the ethical issues

  -The study has been heavily criticised for exposing participants to significant psychological stress and deception.

  -For example, participants believed they were giving real shocks and were visibly distressed, with some experiencing seizures-Although Milgram debriefed participants afterward, the ethical concerns remain significant and goes against BPS
• Another weakness is the fact it was an artificial task

  -The task of giving electric shocks to a stranger is highly unusual and unlikely to reflect real-life obedience scenarios.

  -Participants may have gone along with it because they didn’t believe the setup was real or felt pressure in the artificial setting. (dc)

  -Perry (2013) listened to tapes of Milgram’s ppts and reported many of them expressed their doubts in the shocks. -this reduces the ecological validity
• Another weakness is that it is an androcentric and ethnocentric sample

  -Milgram’s sample consisted solely of American men, mostly from the New Haven area.-This excludes women and people from other cultures, which may affect how obedience is expressed in different social contexts.-Therefore, the findings lack population validity and may not reflect obedience levels in more diverse populations.
• Another weakness is more ethical issues (deception)

  -Participants were misled about several aspects of the study, including the true aim, the reality of the electric shocks, and the identity of the learner (a confederate).-For example, they were told it was a memory study and believed they were delivering real shocks to another person, which caused visible distress for many.

  -This deception undermines fully informed consent and raises ethical concerns about participants’ right to make an informed choice, which would not meet current BPS ethical standards.