Burger Flashcards
(39 cards)
1
Q
background info
A
- interested in whether people would obey an authoritative figure
- believed that his study would produce similar findings to Milgram
- adapted his research to adhere to ethical guidelines and limit distress to participants
- wanted to look at gender differences in obedience
2
Q
aims
A
- replicate Milgram in an ethical way and investigate if there’s a difference between Milgrams baseline and 2009 Burger
- investigate if personality influenced individual differences or if it’s just situational factors
- investigate if observing someone refusing to obey influenced obedience
- to see whether Milgrams findings were era bound, affected by gender,empathy or desire to control
3
Q
sample
A
- 29 men
- 41 women
- mean age = 41.9
- age = 20-81yrs
- promised $50 for 2, 45 minute sessions
- independent groups design
4
Q
procedure - selecting participants
A
initially screened to :
- check no one was familiar with Milgram
- screen out anyone who had taken 2+ psychology lessons
- age job education and ethnicity questioned
- an anxiety hierarchy used to assess state of mind
- clinical psychologist did structured interview
- self report method
5
Q
what did the clinical psychologists structured interview consist of
A
- screening out anyone who would respond negatively to the study
- 38.2% of remainder was still paid in full
6
Q
self report method
A
questionnaire measuring participants empathetic concern for others and desire for personal control
7
Q
what happened after the screening process
A
6 participants dropped out with 5 admitting to knowing Milgrams study and 1 not attending follow up session
8
Q
Independent variable
A
whether participants were put in base condition or model refusal condition
9
Q
Dependent variable
A
obedience = measured in how many volts participants gave before refusal and exhausted all other prods - or reached 150 volts
10
Q
how were the participants put into the 2 groups
A
- randomly
- gender split was roughly equal
11
Q
experimenter
A
- white male in his mid 30’s
12
Q
confederate
A
- white male in his mid 50’s
13
Q
what was the fake aim
A
to look at the effect of punishment on learning
14
Q
procedure - base condition
A
- pps drew fake lots to assign roles with confederate
- pps watched confederate get strapped into the chair
- word pair task explained
- teachers were told to administer a shock if the word pair was remembered incorrectly
- pps taken to room with shock generator
- when learner gave wrong answer, pps gave a shock of 15 volts, which increased every time an incorrect answer was given
- after learner got it wrong, teacher heard pre-recorded sounds from learner
15
Q
when was the task ended
A
- all verbal prods had been exhausted
- 150 v had been reached and pps were still ready to continue
16
Q
what was the apparatus in the room like where the confederate was strapped in
A
- a chair facing a table with 4 switches
17
Q
details about confederate being strapped into the chair
A
- electrodes, blisters, shock generators mentioned
18
Q
word pair task
A
- confederate was told to remember 25 word pairs
- teacher would read a word pair and then 1 word from the word pair along with 4 other words
- the learner had to recall which of the words belonged with the original word pair
- learner was punished if they remembered incorrectly
19
Q
at 75 volts, what did the pps hear
A
- a small grunt
- this got louder up to 150 volts, with the learner mentioning a heart condition
20
Q
prods
A
- predetermined statements the experimenter had to say to encourage the participant to continue
- these were said in a fixed order
21
Q
prod example
A
there will be no permanent tissue damage
22
Q
after experiment - base condition
A
- pps were shown shock generator to be fake
- shown confederate who was perfectly okay
- fully debriefed
23
Q
procedure - model refusal condition
A
- similar to base however :
- another confederate was included
- new confederate was teacher 1
- both teachers watched confederate learner get strapped in
- same procedure until -
- teacher 1 started experiment
- at 90 v teacher 1 withdrew
- experimenter asked teacher 2 (pp) to continue
- teacher 1 sat silently
24
Q
how was the second confederate, teacher 2 selected
A
matched to participants gender
25
what did teacher 1 say at 90 volts
" don't know about this "
- didn't continue after 1st prod
26
findings
- 70% base condition went to continue after 150 volts
- 63.3% of modelled condition continued to 150 volts
- participants in modelled condition went to first prompt significantly earlier than base condition
- a higher % females went to 150 volts = nothing significant though
27
conclusions
- results found in both experiments are similar to Milgrams research 45 yrs ago = time and changes in societies culture did not have an effect, nor did refusal of confederate
- burger suggests the same situational factors must be around today and similarities found were even more important as he'd changed aspects and still found high obedience levels
- Lack of empathy isn't a valid explanation of high obedience rates
- desire for control determines likelihood of obedience
- no difference in age, gender, education
28
why is lack of empathy not a valid reason for high obedience
defiant and obedient participants had similar scores on empathy test
29
Generalisability - low
- samples not representative of target population; pre study screening = 38% of population were deselected to exclude anyone who may have been distressed
- final sample may have been more psychologically robust than general population
- may have led to lower obedience levels
30
Generalisability - counterargument
- Beauvois = did Milgram replication in France only excluding participants with health problems including medication
- 80 % participants were deemed obedient
31
Generalisability - high
- both males and females
- mixed age range of 20-81 years
- wider population represented than Milgram
32
Reliability - high
- Standardised procedures
- word pairs
- shock generator increase by 15 v
- experimenter prods, give e.g
- experiment can be repeated again to check for consistency of results and data trends
33
Applications - low
- Elms = Burgers research tells us very little about real world applications
- participants stopped before there was any tension/distress about what they were doing
- situation lost its potency
34
Applications high -
- explains why people are so obedient towards authority figures, e.g people obey their bosses at works instructions to fire their colleagues
- explains world attrocities, e.g holocaust, due to power of authority
35
Validity - high internal
- No participants had knowledge of Milgrams study, those who did were excluded
- All participants that had taken 2+ psychology classes were excluded, reducing risk of demand characteristics
36
Validity - low internal
- we do not know 100% participants who went up to 150 volts would have gone up to 450 volts
37
Validity - low external
- involved artificial situation as people do not usually take part in administering shocks
38
Ethics - low
Benjamin & Simpson - say todays ethical standards mean only very tame studies can be conducted
- detrimental to progress
- some feel that rights of participants are being given more weight in ethical decisions than wider research in society
39
Ethics - high
- Participants were continuously reminded of their right to withdraw, twice on paper, once verbally
- pps were screened to check they were mentally stable and wouldn't endure to much distress in the experiment
