Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Obedience (situational variables) - Coggle Diagram
Obedience (situational variables)
proximity
: closeness of teacher and learner
in baseline study, teacher could hear the learner but not see him. proximity variation, teacher and learner were in the same room and the obedience rate dropped from 65% to 45%
in the touch proximity variation, the teacher forced the learner's hand onto the shock plate, obedience rate was 30%
in the remote instruction variation, the experimenter left the room and gave instructions by telephone, the obedience rate was 20% and participants often pretended to give shocks
explanation:
decreased proximity allows people to psychologically distance themselves from the consequence of their actions. for example, when the teacher and learner were physically separated, the teacher was less aware of the harm done, so was obedient
location:
prestige of setting
the study was conducted in a run-down building rather than the prestigious yale university (as in the baseline)
obedience dropped to 47.5%
explanation:
Obedience was higher in the university because the setting was legitimate and had authority
uniform:
communicates authority
in the baseline study, the experimenter wore a grey lab coat (as a kind of uniform)
in one variation, he was called away by an 'inconvenient' phone call at the start of the procedure, his role was taken over by an 'ordinary member of the public'
obedience fell to 20%, the lowest of these variations
explanation:
a uniform is a stromg symbol of legitimate authority gfranted by society, someone without a uniform is less right to expect obedience
evaluation
strength
: research support for the influence of situational variables
Bickman's (1974) confederates dressed in different outfits (jacket and tie / milkman / security guard) and issued demands to give to the people of New York
people were twice as likely to obey the 'secuirty gaurd' than the 'jacked and tie' confederate
this shows that a situational variable, such as uniform does have a powerful effect on obedience
strength:
cross-cultural replication of Milgram's research
Meeus and Raaijmakers (1986) worked with Dutch participants, who were ordered to say stressful comments to interviewees
they found 90% obedience and obedience fell when proximity decreased
this shows that Milgram's findings are not limited to American males but are valid across cultures
counterpoint:
however, smith and bond (1998) note that most replications have taken place in westeren societies culturally not that different from the USA. we cannot conclude that milgram's findings about proximity, location and uniform apply to people in all cultures
limitation
: low internal validity
orne and holland (1968) suggested the variations were even more likely to trigger suspicion because of the extra experimentalk manipulation
In the variation where the experimenter was replaced by 'a member of the public' even Milgram recognised this was so contrived that some participants may have worked it out
therefore it is unclear whether the results are due to obedience or because the participants saw the deception and 'play-acted'
demand charatceristics