Milgram's 1963 obedience study

Question 1

where was the study conducted

Answer 1

Yale University

Question 2

what type of observation was used

Answer 2

structured observation

Question 3

what type of sample was used

Answer 3

volunteer sample

recruited through a newspaper advertisement

Question 4

how much were the participants paid

Answer 4

$4

Question 5

who was the authority figure and facts about them

Answer 5

Experimenter
Mr Williams
Wore a lab coat

Question 6

who was the confederate and what role did they have

Answer 6

Mr Wallace
always assigned the learner role
the participant thought that Mr Wallace was another participant

Question 7

what role did the participant have

Answer 7

teacher

Question 8

what were participants assured about

Answer 8

that the shocks would not cause lasting damage

Question 9

generator

Answer 9

switches horizontally arranged in a row

switches from 15v to 450v - increased voltage in 15v intervals

labels above switches such as ‘danger’ and ‘slight shock’

Question 10

what happened to the learner at 150v

Answer 10

learner began verbally protesting

Question 11

what happened to the learner at 300v

Answer 11

learner banged his head on the wall and stopped answering

Question 12

were the responses from the learner live or pre recorded

Answer 12

pre recorded

Question 13

how many prods were used and give an example of one

Answer 13

4 prods

‘you have no other choice but to continue’

Question 14

what happened once all 4 prods had been exhausted

Answer 14

the observation ended

Question 15

3 reasons why the observations ended

Answer 15

if all 4 prods had been exhausted

if the teacher got up and left

if 450v had been reached

Question 16

aim

Answer 16

to find out if participants would obey orders from an authority that went against their values

to see if participants would deliver electric shocks to a confederate sufficiently powerful to kill somone

Question 17

how many participants and info about them

Answer 17

40

male

american

Question 18

what percentage of participants reached the 450v shock

Answer 18

65%

Question 19

what qualitative data was produced

Answer 19

14 ppts showed nervous laughter

sweating, trembling and groaning

Question 20

conclusions

Answer 20

ordinary people will obey orders in the correct situation

Question 21

situational explanations for the obedience

Answer 21

Yale university - prestigious setting - ppts convinced nothing unethical could go on here - disputed by milgrams experiment 10 (rundown office block)

volunteers committed themselves - sense of obligation

ppts asssured the shocks were painful but not dangerous

study seemed to have a worthy cause - being done to further science

Question 22

generalisability - volunteer sample

Answer 22

low - more likely to be obedient

volunteers tend to listen to instructions and take the procedure more seriously - representative of people in real life situations of power being misused

Question 23

generalisability - sample

Answer 23

low - all male and all american

cannot be generalised to females and is ethnocentric

however, Milgram’s variation 8 tested women and it found that women had the same obedience rate as men (65%)

Question 24

reliability

Answer 24

high - standardised procedure - can be replicated

e.g. the pre-scriped prods used by the experimenter (‘you have no other choice but to continue’)

allows inter-rater reliability to be established - Burger (2009) replicated Milgram’s study and followed his scripts

Question 25

Application to real life

Answer 25

study demonstrates how obedience to authority works - can be used to increase obedience in workplaces and prisons - research displayed authority figures should wear symbols of authority (uniforms)

can apply as reasoning as to why the Nazi’s followed orders - Adolf Eichman

Question 26

Validity - ecological validity

Answer 26

low - task is artificial - Milgram’s reply is that events such as the Holocaust were just as unusual - the participants were the same as his as they had been dropped into a situation that was unfamiliar and that they did not know how to respond to

Question 27

Ethics - Deception

Answer 27

about the shocks and the purpose of the test

however, the study would not have been possible without deception

Question 28

Ethics - informed consent

Answer 28

no informed consent gained - were told it was a memory test and not an obedience test

Question 29

Ethics - right to withdraw

Answer 29

prods made it difficult to withdraw

this treatment drags science into disrepute and makes it harder to recruit for future research

Question 30

ethics - debriefing

Answer 30

good - participants debriefed

Question 31

validity - Gina Perry

Answer 31

Some of the participants suggested the study was fake and were ‘play-acting’

Milgram filmed his participants and they were physically shaking with distress, which clearly disputes this.