Explanations For Obedience - Variations Of Milgram (1963)

Question 1

Agentic state

What did Milgram argue about?

Answer 1

That people operate in one of two ways when faced with social situations:

Either autonomously or enter an Agentic state

Question 2

Agentic state

What is an Agentic shift?

Answer 2

When a person changes from an autonomous state to an Agentic state

Question 3

What happens to the levels of obedience when an individuals enters the Agentic state and why does this affect obedience.

Answer 3

Increases the level of obedience.
This is because:
The level of personal responsibility decreases

Question 4

Proximity (Variation)

Milgram conducted a variation where the learner and teacher were seated in the same room.

What did the percentage of obedience (of administering 450V) drop to and why?

Answer 4

The administration of 450V dropped from 65% to 40%

This was because the teacher was able to experience the learners pain directly

Question 5

Proximity (Variation)

Milgram conducted another variation where the learner and teacher were seated in the same room but this time the teacher had to force the learners hand directly onto the shock plate

What happened to the percentage of obedience?

Answer 5

It dropped to a further 30%

Question 6

What does proximity demonstrate within Milgram’s study?

Answer 6

The closer the proximity of the teacher and the learner, the lower the level of obedience

Question 7

Location (Variation)

Milgram conducted a variation in a run down building instead of Yale university in order to test the power of “Location”

What happened to the level of obedience?
Did it increase or decrease?
Provide a percentage to support your answer

Answer 7

Decreased
Percentage of participants administering 450V went from 65% to 47.5%

This emphasises that less credible locations results in the reduction in the levels of obedience

Question 8

Uniform (Variation)

Milgram examined the power of uniform in his variation.
The experimenter wore a lab coat indicating his status.
The experimenter was called away and replaced by an ordinary clothed confederate

What happened to the level of obedience?

Answer 8

Dropped from 65% to 20% empathising the dramatic power of uniform

Question 9

Uniform (Variation)

Bickman (1974)
Investigated the power of uniform in a field experiment in NYC.
Used three make actors in different uniforms
1) Dressed as a Milkman
2) Dressed as a Security Guard
3) Dressed in ordinary clothes

Actors asked the public to either:
Give some money for the parking metre
Pick up a bag
Stand on the other side of the bus top which said “no standing”

Who did the public obey more and what does uniform indicate?

Answer 9

The guard was obeyed 76% of occasions
Milkman 47%
Ordinary clothes 30%

Uniform infers a sense of legitimate authority and power

Question 10

Legitimate authority

Answer 10

For a person to obey an instruction, they need to believe that the authority is legitimate and this can be affected by multiple variables

For example:
Location
Uniform

Question 11

Milgram’s Variations Quiz

Someone else administered the shock

Answer 11

Agentic state
92.5%

Question 12

Milgram’s variation Quiz

Milgram’s Original Study

Answer 12

No variation
65%

Question 13

Milgram’s Variation Quiz

The experiment took place in a run down building

Answer 13

Location & Legitimate Authority
48%

Question 14

Milgram’s Variation Quiz

The teacher and learner were in the same room

Answer 14

Proximity (Leaner)
40%

Question 15

Milgram’s Variation Quiz

The teacher had to force the learners hand onto a shock plate

Answer 15

Proximity (Learner)
30%

Question 16

Milgram’s Variation Quiz

The experimenter gave instructions to the teacher over the phone

Answer 16

Proximity (Authority figure)
21%

Question 17

Milgram’s Variation Quiz

The experimenter was replaced by another ‘participant’ in ordinary clothes

Answer 17

Uniform & Legitimate Authority
20%

Question 18

Milgram study evaluation limitation

Answer 18

Milgram’s study has been criticised for lacking ecological validity.

Milgram tested obedience in a laboratory, which is very different to real-life situations of obedience, where people are often asked to follow more subtle instructions, rather than administering electric shocks.

As a result we are unable to generalise his findings to real life situations of obedience and cannot conclude that people would obey less severe instructions in the same way.

Question 19

Milgram’s study evaluation limitation

Answer 19

Milgram’s study has been heavily criticised for breaking numerous ethical guidelines, including: deception, right to withdraw and protection from harm.

Milgram deceived his participants as he said the experiment was on ‘punishment and learning’, when in fact he was measuring obedience, and he pretended the learner was receiving electric shocks. In addition, it was very difficult for participants with withdraw from the experiment, as the experimenter prompted the participants to continue. Finally, many of the participants reported feeling exceptionally stressed and anxious while taking part in the experiment and therefore they were not protect from psychological harm.