milgrams study

• milgram's study was regarding obedience (1963)

  • looked at obedience to authority
  • gave people orders to hurt and possible kill someone
• when giving orders by legitimate authoritive figure (experimenter in lab coat) individuals will carry out adminstratory electric shocks to 'learner' - milgrams study
• procedure of milgrams study

  • pilot study beforehand - asked psychologists what proportion of people would give electric shocks to others when ordered to do so - 3% thought they would
  • milgram advertised for volunteers to take part in study of effects of punishment on learning
  • lab setting (Yale uni) - volunteers assigned as teacher and told to give increasingly lethal electric shocks in learners (confederates) said wrong answer
  • if teacher hesitated - experimentory (authoritative figure) would give verbal prods to make the continue (please carry on)
• results of milgrams study

  • all volunteers gave shocks up to 300v
  • 63% contibued till 450V - even though learner fell silent at 300 and teacher knew it was equal to lethal shock
• conclusion for milgrams study into obedience

  • people have capacity to follow order that lead to inflicting harm on others
  • could be due to being in agentic state where they switch off conscience - feels as if it is authoritative figure who is responsible for volunteers actions and not selves
• milgram suggested we are more likely to obey a person who has higher position/status in social hierarchy (individuals more likely to carry out instructions given by authoritative figure) - legitimacy of authority highlights whether individual will obey figure or not
• milgram created 'baseline study' where it could be replicated in varying ways

  • found situational factors may explain behaviour better than original belief that obedience is due to personality
  • during research he identified 3 factors influencing level of obedience shown by ptts
• situational variables affecting obedience

  • proximity
  • location
  • uniform
• proximity - situational variable affecting obedience

  • physical closeness/distance of authoritative figure to person theyre giving order to
  • original study - teacher and learner in adjoining rooms - 65%
  • variation - teacher and learner in same room - 40%
• milgram changes variables in ways to study effects of proximity

  • 1st condition - teacher forced learners hand on electroshock plate - touch proximity - obedience rate dropped BY 30%
  • 2nd condition - experimenter left room + give instructions to teacher by phone - remote proximity - obedience rate dropped TO 20/5% (found teachers tend to give weaker/pretend shocks due to authoritative figure not being in close proximity
• location

  • place where order is issued (status/prestige association with location)
  • original study - prestigious (Yale uni) - 65%
  • variation - run down office in town - 47.5%
  • shows higher status locations - ptts more likely to obey due to association with high status/authoritative figures
• uniform

  • people in positions of authority often have specific outfits which is symbolic for their authority - indicates who is entitles to expect obedience (e.g. police)
  • original study - experimenter wore lab coat = 65%
  • variation - experimentory role carried out by member of public (random clothes) = 20%
• study to support uniform as situational variable - bickman

  • used 3 actors dressed as milkman, security guard and normal clothes
  • actors asked public to follow 1/3 instructions - pick up bag, give someone money for parking metre, stand near bus stop sign saying 'no standing'
  • guard = 76% obeyed
  • milkman = 47%
  • normal clothed = 30%
  • results suggest people more likely to obey when instructed by someone wearing uniform - infers sense of legitimate authority or power
• legitimate authority key study - hofling

  • hofling investigated power of legitimate authority in natural field (hospital)
  • found 21/22 NURSES were easily influenced in carrying out orders - even though not meant to take instructions by phone or exceed allowed dose
  • hofling demonstrated people are unwilling to question supposed 'authority' - nurses didnt question why they were needing to give larger doses of medication than normal.
• evaluation for milgrams study into obedience points

  • ethical issues
  • individual differences
  • reliability
• ethical issues being eval point for milgrams study

  • psychologist criticised milgram for lack of concern towards wellbeing of research ptts
  • example - milgram deceives ptts for telling them they will be involved in study on effects of punishment on learning - deceiving ptts makes it difficult for them to make informed decisions before giving consent upon participating
  • milgram stated ptts were free to leave (right to withdraw) however the 'prods' from experiments made it difficult for ptts who felt they had not choice but to continue
  • limits conclusion as protection of harm is limited
• gender differences (+) being eval point for milgrams study

  • in 1978 it was assumed by psychologists that women would be more susceptible to social influence than men - means there will be gender differences in obedience
  • milgram had one condition were ptts were female - found self reported tension in women who went to max shock level (higher than men)
  • blass studied 9 replications of milgrams study that had both m/f ptts - found no evidence for gender differences in obedience
  • strength as it allowed explanation to be applied to both genders as obedience seen to not differ
• reliability being eval point for milgrams study

  • milgrams study can be seen as relaible due to successfully replicating his study previous times afterwards
  • this was conducted through using multiple different situational variables which were measured on how they affect levels of obedience
  • able to replicate experiment with valid results - strength of experiment as it allows others to replicate
  • CONTRADICTORY - due to having first conducted the experiment in 1963 - could be potential for temporal validity due to change in how much authoritative figures are obeyed (police officers)