Contemporary Study: Burger (2009)

Question 1

Which of Milgram’s studies did Burger replicate?

Answer 1

Replicated experiment 5 the ‘new baseline condition’

Question 2

What happened in Milgram’s experiment 5?

Answer 2

Milgram introduced the idea that the ‘victim’ had a heart condition and this was mentioned when the victim was strapped into the chair

There was a strict schedule for the victim to cry out which was important in Burger’s study

Question 3

What did Burger call ‘the point of no return’?

Answer 3

150v

This is where the victim calls out and demands to be released from the study

Question 4

How did Burger make his study more ethical than Milgram?

Answer 4

Burger stopped the study at 150v for all participants

The participants were told at least three times that they could withdraw and still keep their payment

Participants were told immediately that the shocks hadn’t been real

Question 5

What did Burger hypothesise?

Answer 5

That there would be very little difference in obedience between the 1960s and his own study in 2009

That there would be less obedience if refusal was modelled by someone else

There would be no gender differences in the obedience levels of the participants

Question 6

How were participants recruited for the study?

Answer 6

Participants responded to an advert

Question 7

What were participants screened for?

Answer 7

Screened to check they weren’t familiar with Milgram’s research

Hadn’t taken more than two psychology classes and their mental health was sound

Around 30% of volunteers were discarded based on these grounds

Question 8

What did the remaining sample of participants consist of?

Answer 8

Consisted of 29 men and 41 women aged between 20 and 81

Participants were promised $50

Question 9

How were participants allocated to conditions?

Answer 9

Randomly allocated to two conditions whilst ensuring that the gender balance was roughly equal

Question 10

Who was the experimenter and confederate?

Answer 10

Experimenter was a white man in his mid 30s

The confederate was a white male in his 50s

Question 11

How were the roles of the participants and confederate determined?

Answer 11

Participants drew lots to see who would be the teacher and who would be the learner

The lots were rigged so that the participant was always the teacher

Question 12

How did the procedure start in Burger’s study?

Answer 12

The apparatus was introduced which was the same as Milgram’s word pair task

The confederate indicated they had a slight heart condition and the experimenter explained that although the shocks might be painful they were not dangerous

Question 13

What happened at 150v in Burger’s study?

Answer 13

The learner started to yell that they wanted to get out and about their heart condition

The experimenter would end the study if the participant pressed the 150v switch and was willing to continue

Question 14

What happened in the ‘modelled refusal’ condition?

Answer 14

There was another teacher who was in fact a confederate

This teacher refused to continue after the first verbal prod at 90v, the other teacher (participant) was then asked to take over

Question 15

What were the results of the base condition of Burger’s study?

Answer 15

Stopped at 150v or sooner - 12 (30%)

Continued after 150v (went to continue but were prevented) - 28 (70%)

Question 16

What were the results of the modelled refusal condition of Burger’s study?

Answer 16

Stopped at 150v or sooner - 11 (36.7%)

Continued after 150v (went to continue but were prevented) - 19 (63.3%)

Question 17

What did Burger find between his study and Milgram’s?

Answer 17

Difference between Burger’s findings and Milgram’s weren’t statistically significant

Question 18

What did Burger find in terms of gender differences?

Answer 18

Although women were more reluctant to continue than men in the modelled refusal condition

When Burger used a chi-squared statistical test to analyse data there was no significant difference between male and female obedience

Question 19

What did Burger conclude?

Answer 19

Concluded that judging by his partial replication of Milgram’s study; he would expect to see the same level of obedience in his participants if they had been allowed to continue beyond 150v

He found the same high levels of obedience as were seen 45 years earlier showing that the situation is still a powerful factor

Question 20

What are the strengths of Burger’s study?

Answer 20

Reliable

Ethical

Quantitative data

Question 21

What are the weaknesses of Burger’s study?

Answer 21

Ecological validity

Internal validity

Generalisability

Question 22

Why is reliability a strength of Burger’s study?

Answer 22

Burger used almost exactly the same procedure as Milgram in terms of the standardised procedure

The replication allowed Burger to compare his own findings with Milgram to check whether they were consistent therefore increasing the reliability of his findings

Question 23

Why is ethical a strength of Burger’s study?

Answer 23

Through careful screening Burger was able to ensure that participants were suitable to take part in the procedure

In addition, participants were told they could withdraw at least 3 times and by stopping the procedure at 150v, Burger avoided unnecessary distress to participants

Question 24

Why is quantitative data a strength of Burger’s study?

Answer 24

Quantitative data was collected relating to the percentage of participants who would continue shocking up to 150v

Such quantitative data is considered to be objective and Burger was able to analyse this data using a chi-squared statistical test to analyse differences between his and Milgram’s findings

Such comparisons allowed conclusions to be made about levels of obedience 45 years later

Question 25

Why is ecological validity a weakness of Burger’s study?

Answer 25

Burger used a lab experiment which allowed him to control the procedure but also meant that the task of administering shocks in a word pair task is unlike a real life situation where orders must be obeyed therefore lowering ecological validity

Question 26

Why is internal validity a weakness of Burger’s study?

Answer 26

Whilst trying to establish that it was the situation causing high levels of obedience, other variables such as the experimenter taking responsibility or the ‘victim’ being in another room may have had an effect upon the responses therefore making it difficult to check internal validity

Question 27

Why is generalisability a weakness of Burger’s study?

Answer 27

The participants may not be representative of a wider population

Participants were not randomly selected but instead were self-selected and then discarded according to several criteria, including their knowledge of psychology and their levels of anxiety

This would leave an unrepresentative sample of participants and the findings would not be generalisable to the wider population