Milgram's Research Into Obedience

• Procedure


  •Milgram's study involved 40 male participants recruited through newspaper ads. Who were told they would be taking part in a study of how punishment affects learning. They were offered $4.50 to take part and were aged between 20-50yrs old.
• Procedure


  • There were two experimental confederates: an experimenter, and a 47-year-old man who was introduced as another volunteer participant.
• Procedure


  •The two participants drew lots to see who would act as the 'teacher' and the 'learner: This was rigged so that the real participant was always the teacher and the 'fake' participant the learner. The ppts were told they could leave at any time.
• Procedure


  •The teacher was required to test the learner on his ability to remember word pairs. Every time he got one wrong the teacher had to administer increasingly strong electric shocks, starting at 15 volts, and then continuing up to the maximum of 450 volts in 15 volt increments.
• Procdure


  •The learner, sitting in another room, gave mainly wrong answers and received his (fake) shocks in silence until they reached the 300 volt level (very strong shocks).•At this point he pounded on the wall and then gave no response to the next question. He repeated this at 315 volts and from then on said/did nothing.
• Procedure


  •If the teacher asked to stop at any point, the experimenter had a series of ‘verbal prods‘ to repeat, such as saying, 'It is absolutely essential that you continue‘ or, 'You have no other choice, you must go on.•
• Findings


  •Before the study, Milgram asked psychiatrists, college students and colleagues to predict how long participants would go before refusing to continue. Consistently these groups predicted that very few would go beyond 150 volts and only 3% would administer the full 450 volts.
• Findings 


  •However, contrary to these expectations, 26 of the 40 participants (65%) continued to the maximum shock level, 450 volts. This was despite the shock generator being labelled 'Danger: severe shock at 420 volts and 'XXX‘ at 450.
• Findings 


  •All participants went to 300 volts with only five (12.5%) stopping there, the point at which the learner first objected.•Ppts were debriefed and assured their behaviour was normal.•84% of participants said after the study that they were glad they took part.
• A02/3

  Hofling et al. (1966)

  21/22 = 95% obeyed proving good external validity
• Variations: proximity


  •In the baseline (original) study, the teacher and learner were in adjoining rooms so the teacher could hear the learner but not see him. In the proximity variation, they were in the same room. Obedience then dropped from 65% to 40%.•In another variation, the teacher had to force the learner’s hand onto an ‘electroshock’ plate when he refused to answer a question. Obedience in this condition dropped to 30%.
• Variations: proximity


  •In another variation, the experimenter left the room and gave instructions to the teacher by telephone. Obedience in this condition dropped to 20.5%. The participants also frequently pretended to give shocks or gave weaker ones than they were ordered to.
• Variations: location


  •In this variation, Milgram changed the location of the study.•He conducted the study in a run-down building rather than the prestigious university setting where it was originally conducted.
• Variations: location


  •In this situation, the experimenter had less authority.•Obedience fell to 47.5%. Whilst this is still quite high, it is less than the original 65%.
• Variations: uniform


  •In the baseline study, the experimenter wore a grey lab coat as a symbol of his authority (a kind of uniform).
• Variations: uniform


  •In one variation, the experimenter was called away because of an inconvenient telephone call right at the start of the procedure. The role of the experimenter was taken over by an ‘ordinary member of the public’ (really a confederate) in everyday clothes rather than a lab coat. Obedience rates dropped to 20%.