practical

Question 1

background info: what do you know about why people are obedient? what they are we going to be investigating?

Answer 1

• people are obedient to their authoritative figures and are most likely doing to follow orders given by them
• agency theory - autonomous state and agentic state
• milgram

Question 2

what is the aim?

Answer 2

• to see if males or females perceive themselves to be more obedient

Question 3

what is the iv?

Answer 3

• gender

Question 4

what is the dv?

Answer 4

• obedience

Question 5

what is the alternative hypothesis?

Answer 5

• there will be a perceived different in levels of obedience between males and females

Question 6

what is the null hypothesis?

Answer 6

• there will be no different in perceived levels of obedience between males and females. any difference is due to chance

Question 7

what sampling technique was used and why?

Answer 7

• opportunity - people who are available at the time and fit the criteria
• time and cost effective

Question 8

what are the ethical guidelines followed?

Answer 8

• used ppts that are 16+ so they can give their consent to take part in the questionnaire
• ppts were told they have the right to withdraw from the study (in the brief and debrief)
• to maintain confidentiality, no named were taken, just their gender and age

Question 9

where did your quan and qual data come from?

Answer 9

• quan: closed ended/likert scale questions
• qual: open ended questions

Question 10

abstract

Answer 10

• based on Milgram’s agency theory and previous research on gender differences in obedience
• includes Milgram’s original study and latane’s social impact theory
• aim: to investigate perceptions of gender differences in obedience
• alternative hypothesis: there will be a perceived difference in obedience between males and females (two tailed, non directional)
• null hypothesis: no perceived difference in obedience; any difference is due to chance
• sampling method: opportunity sampling
• ppts: 44 total (22 males, 22 females)
• method: questionnaire with 10 questions
  
  • collected both quan and qual data

Question 11

introduction

Answer 11

• aim: to investigate whether males and females perceive themselves to be more obedient
• linked theory: Milgram’s agency theory
  
  • autonomous state: individual sees themselves as in control, with free will and voluntary actions
  • agentic state: individuals sees themselves as an agent of authority, lacking free will
• inspired by Milgram’s original study:
  
  • found 65% of ppts (both males and females) obeyed an authority figure
  • found little difference in actual obedience between genders
• alternative hypothesis: there will be a perceived difference in levels of obedience between males and females (two tailed/non-directional)
• null hypothesis: there will be no difference between perception of obedience between males and females and any difference will be due to chance

Question 12

method

Answer 12

• ppts:
  
  • 44 total ppts
  • 22 females and 22 males
  • age range: 16 to 54 years old
• sampling method:
  
  • opportunity sampling
  • ppts available at the time who met the criteria (eg, over 16, no psychological knowledge)
  • time and cost effective
• apparatus:
  
  • timer (10 minute limit for questionnaire)
  • questionnaire sheet (both open and closed-ended questions)
  • debrief sheet (read at the end explaining investigation)
• questionnaire design:
  
  • closed-ended questions with 7-point likert scale (1=least likely, 7=most likely) - quan data
  • open-ended follow-up asking “why?” - qual data
• procedure:
  
  • ppts approached and given standardised instructions
  • instructions included: 10 mins to complete, right to withdraw
  • informed consent obtained
  • questionnaire completed
  • debrief provided explaining aim and allowing questions to be asked
• ethical considerations
  
  • standardised procedure for all ppts
  • right to withdraw at any time
  • confidentiality maintained (except age and gender)
  • debrief included at the end
  • deception used (ppts not told full aim initially) to avoid biased responses due to gender norms
  • deception justified to maintain data validity

Question 13

results

Answer 13

• quan results:
  
  • mean score:
    
    • males: 26
    • females: 30
    • suggests females are perceived as more obedient
  • median score:
    
    • males: 26
    • females: 30.5
  • mode score:
    
    • males: 26
    • females: 31
  • range:
    
    • males: 20
    • females: 12
    • indicates more variability in male responses
  • bar chart used to visually show how gender may influence perceived obedience
  • scores recorded in frequency table then mean mode median range for each gender was calculated
• qual results (thematic analysis):
  
  • theme 1: concern about consequences (eg getting told off, getting fined)
  • theme 2: makes more obedient when instructions came from authority figures
  • theme 3: both genders more obedient when their actions impact others (eg politeness in public spaces)
  • theme 4: makes more likely to question why they need to obey; if the reason is unclear, obedience drops (eg zoo glass rule)
  • overall: findings were consistent across ppts

Question 14

conclusions

Answer 14

• both genders were more obedient in the presence of high authority
• when no authoritative figure was present, they often didn’t see the point in being obedient

Question 15

hypothesis

Answer 15

• results are significant
• therefore, alternative hypothesis is accepted
• null hypothesis is rejected

Question 16

2 strengths

Answer 16

• one strength of this practical is in terms of reliability. all ppts that has taken part when through the same procedure meaning they all had the same questions to answer within the same time and were given the same instructions too. this means that the practical could be replicated to test for the consistency of results, therefore increasing reliability
• another strength is in terms of validity. for example, after the questionnaire was completed by each ppt, they were given a self-report where questions were asked to ppts directly. this means that the practical has tested what it claims to be testing, increasing construct validity.

Question 17

2 weaknesses

Answer 17

• there are weaknesses of this practical such as generalisability. in this practical, opportunity sampling was used as it was time and cost effective but this could cause a biased sample because ppts were able to approach people they might know personally and could be not representative. this tells us that we are not able to apply the results to the wider populations when it comes to obedience and other phenomena’s.
• another weakness is also the qualitative data. (state how qual data was collected). qual data means that it’s subjective and open to interpretation, which also lacks validity

Question 18

2 improvements

Answer 18

• one improvement to make in this practical is the use of a pilot study. this is when many psychologists try out a draft version of an exp they are planning to conduct on a small sample. the aim of this is to iron out any problems and clarify anything that might be concerning so that the actual exp goes as smoothly as possible.
• another improvement to make is the choice of sampling type. instead of opportunity sampling, there could’ve been a use of random sampling. this is one of the simplest techniques where the sample is selected purely by chance and everyone has an equal chance of being chosen. another sampling method that could’ve been used is stratified sampling. this is when the researcher first breaks down the population in a sampling frame by age, class or gender then create a sample in the same proportions