Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
obedience - a form of social influence in which an individual follows a…
obedience - a form of social influence in which an individual follows a direct order. the person issuing the order is usually a figure of authority who has the power to punish when obedient behaviour is not forthcoming
-
milgram 1963
aim - to measure the extent to which people are willing to obey a command from a figure of authority even if it conflicts with their personal conscience
procedure - 40 male participants were recruited by advertising for volunteers to take part in a study to show how punishment affects learning at Yale University. there were two confederates: the experimenter (authority figure) and the 'learner'. the participant drew lots with the second confederate and always ended up as the 'teacher'. the participant was told that he must administer increasingly stronger electric shocks to the 'learner' each time he answered a question incorrectly.
procedure - the learner sat in another room giving mainly wrong answers and received his (fake) shocks in silence until 300 volts were reached. at this point he pounded on the wall and gave no response to the question, he repeated this at 315 shocks. if the 'teacher' asked to stop, the experimenter had 4 prods - "please continue", "the experiment requires you to continue", "it is absolutely essential that you continue" and "you have no other choice, you must go on"
results - prior to the experiment Milgram asked other psychologists to predict the outcome (they said that no more than 3% would continue to 450 volts). HOWEVER - 65% continued to 450 volts (maximum voltage), all participants shocked to 300 volts, only 12.5% stopped when the learner first objected. participants showed signs of extreme tension - many seen to 'sweat, tremble, stutter' and three had full blown seizures. all participants were debriefed and assured their behaviour was normal
conclusion - the study demonstrates that ordinary people are astonishingly obedient to authority, even when it is morally questionable. this suggests that it is not evil people who are commit atrocities but ordinary people who are just obeying orders.
evaluation
limitation - there are ethical issues with this research. Participants believed they were actually administering electric shocks, increasing in voltage to a dangerous level, to the learner when they gave the wrong answer. this is an issue as participants were at more risk of feeling guilty, therefore suffering from psychological harm due to the experiment.
limitation - another ethical issue is protection from harm. for example, participants were exposed to extreme situations and endured stress, three had 'full blown seizures'. this is an issue as participants were at risk of suffering from severe psychological harm. HOWEVER, AT THE END OF THE EXPERIMENT PARTICIPANTS WERE DEBRIEFED AND TOLD THEIR BEHAVIOUR WAS NORMAL
strength - the experiment has high external validity as Hoflings experiment has similar results. Hoflings experiment was nurses were phoned by an unknown doctor and asked to administer a drug to a patient. to obey the doctor's request, nurses would have to break some hospital rules. He found that 21 out of 22 nurses obeyed the doctor (they were stopped before administering the drug). this shows that Milgrams experiment can be applied to the real world.
limitation - Orne and Holland argued that participants behaved the way they did because they guessed they weren't real shocks so Milgram wasn't testing what he intended. this suggests that the research had low internal validity.
strength - Milgram's findings have been replicated. A French reality tv show partially replicated Milgram's research. Participants were paid to give fake electric shocks to other participants when ordered by the presenter. 80% gave the maximum 450 volts to an apparently unconscious man. this shows that Milgrams research had high external validity, supporting his original conclusions about obedience.
situational variables
proximity - 1. the teacher and the learner were in the same room (obedience decreased from 65% to 40%) 2. the teacher had to force the learners hand onto a shock plate ( obedience reduced to 30%) 3. the experimenter left the room and gave instructions via phone call (obedience reduced to 20.5%) obedience reduced because the teacher could see the learner meaning the teacher felt more guilty (the closer the pps were to the learner the more guilty they felt) and they couldn't see the authority figure so didn't feel the pressure
uniform - the experimenter in a lab coat was called away because of a phone call and the role of the experimenter was taken over by a member of the public (confederate) in plain clothes - obedience dropped from 65% to 20%. obedience reduced because the 'member of the public' didn't hold any authority as they weren't in uniform so participants felt they didn't have to as they weren't a legitimate figure of authority
location - conducted the experiment in a run down building rather than a prestigious university - obedience fell to 47.5% obedience fell because the experimenter had less authority and the location wasn't as prestigious