Situational variables affecting obedience

Question 1

Situational variables

Answer 1

• Milgram (1974) conducted several variations to the original study to see how situation variables affect the level of obedience.
• He investigated proximity, location and uniform.

Question 2

Proximity

Answer 2

• In this variation both teacher and learner were seated in the same room.
• Obedience levels fell to 40% as they could see the learner’s anguish.
• In another variation there was a touch proximity condition where the teacher forced the learner’s hand on a electroshock plate.
• This cause obedience to drop more to 30%.
• In the third variation, instructions were given over the phone.
• This made obedience drop to 21%

Question 3

Location

Answer 3

• He conducted the study in a run down building.
• The obedience level fell to 48%
• Participants did report that the location of Yale gave them confidence in the integrity of the people involved.

Question 4

Uniform

Answer 4

• In the original, the experimenter wore a lab coat which was a symbol of his authority.
• Milgram carried out a variation where the experimenter was replaced due to a phone call by ‘an ordinary member of the public’ in everyday clothes
• Obedience level dropped to 20% the lowest of the variations.

Question 5

Strength: Research support: Bickman

Answer 5

• 3 male researches gave order to 153 random pedestrians in NYC.
• They were dressed as either a milk man, a guard or in a suit.
• Found that participants obeyed the researcher dressed as a guard (80%) much more that the milk man or civilian (40%)

Question 6

Strength: Cross culture replication

Answer 6

• MIRANDA ET AL: obedience rate INCREASED TO 90% with SPANISH STUDENTS
• SMITH + BOND: most replications were done in WESTERN SOCIETIES – not much different to the USA

Question 7

Weakness: Lack on internal validity

Answer 7

• Lab setting + demand characteristics

Question 8

Weakness: The obedience alibi

Answer 8

• Used as an excuse for evil behaviour.