Obedience (Majority Influence) Flashcards
What were the aims of Milgram’s research into obedience?
To find out whether ordinary people would obey a legitimate authority even if it meant injuring or even killing someone else.
Explain the procedures of Milgram’s research.
He recruited 40 male participants through a newspaper advertisement. He advertised the research as being research into how punishment affects learning. It took place at Yale and each participant received $4.50 - they were told they would receive this even if the quit the study part way through. Two confederates were used: the ‘learner’ and the experimenter. The participant had to act as the ‘teacher’ and was told to give the learner increasingly strong electric shocks every time they got a question wrong. The learner was in a different room, so they communicated through radios - but the participant did not know that the screams they heard when they gave the learner a shock were actually fake and pre-recorded. After the participant gave the learner a shock of 300 volts, the learner did not reply to the next question, but the participant was still asked to continue shocking.
What were the findings of Milgram’s research?
65% of participants went all the way to the maximum 450 volts when instructed, this is enough to kill someone. 100% of participants carried on until 300 volts. However, participants showed signs of distress such as nervous laughter and biting their nails.
What did Milgram conclude from his research?
Ordinary people are obedient to unjust authority, so you do not have to be evil to commit crimes. This is a SITUATIONAL explanation rather than a DISPOSITIONAL one.
Evaluate Milgram’s method.
- Some psychologists argue that participants were ‘going along with the act’ during the experiment because they thought the shocks weren’t real, and that they weren’t really distressed, they just wanted to please the experimenter. This questions the research’s INTERNAL VALIDITY. However, when Milgram debriefed his participants, he said that they all said they did not know what was going on.
- Some argue that due to Milgram’s experiment being carried out in a laboratory, behaviour displayed by participants was artificial, meaning the findings cannot be generalised to every day life. Also, due to the use of volunteers, the experiment does not represent the entire population.
- Other research, such as that carried out by Hofling et al, supports the conclusion of Milgram’s experiment. Hofling found that 95% of nurses would give a high dose of an unknown drug to a patient if they were instructed to do so by an ‘authority figure’, showing that SITUATIONAL factors can influence obedience.
Evaluate the ethics of Milgram’s research.
- It could be argued that by not informing participants of his true intentions, Milgram deceived them. Also, in doing so, it meant he could not receive informed consent, as they didn’t actually know what they were consenting to. However, Milgram argues that deception was necessary. Milgram debriefed every participant to reassure them that the way they responded was normal.
- Its argued that, even though Milgram told participants they could withdraw and still receive payment, because he didn’t remind them of this during the experiment, and the use of verbal prods such as ‘please continue’ made participants feel as though they could not leave.
- Milgram has been criticised for not protecting his participants from psychological harm, as they suffered considerable distress during the experiment. However, in a follow up psychological review of the participants, the majority of them said that they were glad they took part, but psychologists still argue that participants may suffer from low self esteem.
How does the agency theory attempt to explain why people obey?
Its the idea that a person is able to shift responsibility on to someone else, so they no longer view themselves as carrying out their own wishes, they are merely acting as an agent for someone else. This is called being in an agentic state. Being in an autonomous state is when a person is acting on their OWN accord.
How does the role of buffers explain why people obey?
Buffers act as barriers between a person and the consequences of their actions. E.g in Milgram’s research when the participant could not see the learner while they were shocking them. In a variation of the experiment, the learner was placed in the same room as the participant, and obedience dropped, supporting the idea of the role of buffers.
How does the presence of a legitimate authority/uniform explain why people obey?
People are more likely to obey when they are asked to do something by someone who seems credible and seems to be in a position of authority. E.g. police, teachers, etc. In a variation of Milgram’s research, the experiment was carried out in a run-down office block and obedience dropped. This could suggest that people saw Milgram as more credible/trustworthy when they knew he was a Yale professor, but when he seemed like an ordinary person they didn’t see him as trustworthy, so they didn’t obey.
How does the ‘authoritarian personality’ theory explain obedience?
It is suggested that some people have an authoritarian personality, and so they are naturally more likely to obey due to having extreme respect to authority figures. They may also be hostile to those of a lower rank. Milgram tested his participants for authoritarian personalities and found that the most obedient participants actually scored higher on these tests, suggesting a person’s personality has an impact on whether or not they obey.
