1.1.2 - Research - Milgram + 3 variations

Question 1

Milgram Study (6AO1)

Answer 1

Aim:

1. To test the idea that ‘Germans are different’ from other people and therefore able to carry out barbaric acts against Jews and other minority groups
2. Milgram wanted to see if pp’s would obey orders to give electric shocks to someone they thought was another pp

Procedure:

1. Pp’s were 40 white males aged 20-50, non graduates from the new haven area
2. Mr Williams was introduced as the experimenter, he was stern and wore a grey lab coat and used 4 prompts such as ‘please continue’
3. Pp’s used impressive looking generator with switches from 15 V to 450 V, marked from ‘slight shock’ to ‘danger’, moving up in 15 V increments when a learner answered the word pair question wrong

Results:

1. 65% of participants followed orders to shock to 450 V, 100% of participants followed orders to shock to 300 V
2. Many pp’s showed signs of distress, especially when giving high level shocks. This was shown by sweating, trembling, stuttering and even a seizure

Question 2

Milgram (AO3x2)

strengths

Answer 2

• The study is reliable as it has well-controlled procedures; for example the participants drew their role however it was rigged so Mr. Wallace was always the learner and the participants were always the teacher. Therefore the study is replicable and although ethics had to be improved, it’s been replicated many times in different countries
• this study has application to society. Results showed 65% of participants followed orders to shock to 450 V. Therefore in the military we should train soldiers to question following immoral orders in order to prevent horrific events like the holocaust

Question 3

Milgram (AO3x3)

Weaknesses

Answer 3

• This study was not generalizable. The participants were 40 white males, age 20 to 50. Non-graduates from the New Haven area. Therefore it was not representative of women, graduates, children/elderly or other ethnicities
• this study lacks task and ecological validity. Shocking another person to 450 V in a lab at Yale University was not something the participants were familiar with. Therefore their behaviour may not represent how they would act in every day life when following orders
• this experiment was not ethical as the participants were deceived. For example, they believe that Mr. Wallace was another participant and that he was receiving actual shocks up to 450 V. Therefore participants did not know the truth about the real procedure of the experiment

Question 4

Variation Study - Experiment 7

aim, procedure, results

Answer 4

Aim:
1. to see if it’s easier to resist instructions from an authority figure if they are not close by - whether the proximity to experimenter influences levels of obedience

Procedure:
1. After giving the initial instructions to shock the Lana, in person, the experimenter left the room and continue to order/prompt the teacher by telephone and a different room

Results:
1. Obedience levels dropped to 22.5% and many participants cheated and missed out shocks or gave last voltage than ordered
2. Some participants lied to the experimenter, assuring they were increasing voltage when they weren’t
3. Some participants deceived the experimenter by pretending to continue the experiment
4. Milgram found that one authority is closer in proximity, obedience is more likely

Question 5

Variation Study - Experiment 10

aim, procedure, results

Answer 5

Aim:
1. Too see if high obedience rates were because of Yale being very prestigious and if obedience rates would fall if the experiment took place in a less prestigious setting

Procedure:
1. Participants believed the experiment was led by a private research farm, research associates of Bridgeport, who were dressed in suits and supposedly walked in a commercial office
2. The building was sparsely furnished, opposite some shops with no apparent connection to Yale University
3. Participants were recruited through Mail and paid for their time

Results:
1. Obedience levels dropped to 47.5% as it was easier to doubt the researchers ethics as they were less prestigious
2. During the debriefing participants said that they question the credentials of the researchers on arrival

Question 6

Variation Study - Experiment 13

aim, procedure, results

Answer 6

Aim:
1. To see the impact of power relations on obedience and to test the role of authority and status on obedience

Procedure:
1. There was a rigged draw so that the participant believed the experimenter and learner were also just ordinary participants
2. The experimenter followed instructions to strap the learner to the electric shock chair but did not tell the teacher/participant what level of shock to give
3. The experimenter got a phone call to leave and told the teacher to get the learner to persist with the word pairs until they need them perfectly
4. The learner suggested to increase the shock every time they made a mistake – repeated this instruction - said it was a good way to conduct the experiment

Results:
1. Obedience levels dropped to 20%
2. The learner Had to go to considerable length to persuade the teacher to continue in the Experimenters absence