AO3

• Demand characteristics


  • The fact that the experimenter remained cool and distant when learner in pain may have led participants to believe it wasn't real
  • Suggests that there was a lack of realism in Milgram's study = low internal validity
• Individual differences


  • We might find gender differences in obedience, however neither Milgram nor Blass (1999) found differences
  • Shows that this gender did not impact on obedience levels
• Historical validity


  • Milgram's study was carried out over 50 years ago and the results may not be relevant today
  • However, Burger (2009) found same levels of obedience as Milgram = suggests results are high in external validity
• Milgram's study was considered unethical as there was an apparent lack of concern for the well-being of his participants
• Milgram deceived his participants by telling them it was a study on the effects of punishment on learning, and therefore they could not give informed consent
• Despite being told at the beginning of the study, the 'prods' from the experimenter made the participants feel like they were unable to withdraw
• Milgram's lack of concern for participant well-being undermines scientific credibility