Milgram's 1963 Basic Study

Question 1

Aim

Answer 1

To examine justifications for the acts of genocide during WW2 and to investigate whether Germans were somehow more obedient towards authority figures. Milgram wanted to test whether volunteer participants would obey orders to give electric shocks and ‘how far would they go?’

Question 2

Participants

Answer 2

40 male volunteer participants paid $4.50 for their service

Question 3

Setting

Answer 3

The study took place at Yale university in a laboratory setting

Question 4

Procedure

Answer 4

The participant and confederate drew lots (which was rigged) to decide the teacher and the learner,
participant was reassured that the shocks would be painful but no permanent tissue damage would occur and participant received a shock of 45 volts,
participant watched confederate being strapped into the chair,
participant was taken into the room containing the shock generator with comments above switches: ‘slight shock’ to ‘danger’,
participant read out word pairs with 3 wrong answers to every 1 right answer,
No sign of protest up until 300 volts when confederate bangs on the wall/complains about heart until silence at 315 volts

Question 5

Prods

Answer 5

1: please continue
2: the experiment requires you to continue
3: it is absolutely essential that you continue
4: you have no other choice but to continue

Question 6

Results

Answer 6

100% to 300 volts
65% to 450 volts - 26/40 men
Many participants showed signs of moral strain; nervousness, sweating, stuttering, 14/40 laughed nervously, gave a sigh of relief when experiment ended

Question 7

Conclusion

Answer 7

Social influence is strong and people obey even if it is causing them distress.

• Yale university is prestigious therefore legitimacy increased
• study seemed to have a worthy cause; about memory
• victim agreed to take part, was not unwilling
• participant felt an obligation to continue
• learner was there by chance
• was thought that the shocks were painful but not dangerous

Question 8

Evaluation

Answer 8

STRENGTHS
standardised procedure meant external factors were unlikely to affect obedience so cause-and-effect conclusions could be drawn; increasing reliability, lead to further research
WEAKNESSES
unethical as pots were deceived and distress was caused and pressure was applied through prompts although they were debriefed but overall they did fully consent, lack of validity as pots trusted the shocks weren’t harmful so they didn’t believe the shocks were truly real, lack of mundane realism due to artificial procedures, lack of ecological validity