Social Influence - Obedience Flashcards
(30 cards)
who did research into obedience?
Stanley Milgram
Briefly what were the procedures of milligrams study?
40 men volunteered. pps was always the teacher and the confederate: Mr Wallace was the learner. Mr Wallace was attached to electrodes giving an apparent electric shock.
what happened when the pps and Mr Wallace were separated in different rooms?
pps had to give increasingly electric shocks when Mr Wallace incorrectly learnt the word pairs. electric shocks were all fake.
when the volts hit 315 what did Mr Wallace pretend to do?
shout and pound on the wall, then fell silent and gave no answers
what did the researcher, wearing a white lab coat do if the participant asked to stop or asked to check on Mr Wallace?
scripted instructions
what percentage of participants gave shocks up to 450 volts? (maximum level of electric shock)
65%
what percentage of participants gave electric shocks up to 300 volts?
100%
how did participants behave in this study?
stressed, cried, anxiety, seizures
what conclusion can we make about Milgram’s study?
people find it difficult to refuse to obey someone who has legitimate authority
what 3 situational variables did milgram research in to?
- proximity (how close they were)
- location
- uniform
proximity: how many pps still gave maximum voltage when mr Wallace and themselves were in the same room?
40%
proximity: how many pps still gave maximum voltage when the researcher gave instructions on the phone?
21% - further away authority figure, less likely to obey
location: original location was Yale university (gave confidence in authority figure) so how many pps gave maximum voltage in a ‘shabby office’
48%
uniform: original- lab coat so how many pps gave maximum voltage when researcher was replaced with confederate with everyday clothes?
20%
what are the two main criticisms of Milgrams study into obedience?
- whether findings accurately reflect how people respond to authority figures
- whether the study was ethical
explain the first criticism of milgrams study: inaccurate results. HOWEVER:
- many argued pps didn’t really believe they were giving electric shocks - therefore not a valid demonstration of obedience to authority. HOWEVER pps did show signs of stress and 70%said it was real
explain the second criticism of Milgrams study: ethics.
- protection from harm although 84% of pps said they were distressed
- deception although gave them a debriefing
- informed consent although no demand characteristics
- withdrawal
what is a third criticism of milgrams study? BUT…
obedient behaviour would not be seen outside of lab setting as its unnatural BUT 21 out of 22 nurses listened to a bogus doctor and went against hospital procedures so it DID happen in real life situation
what are the three explanations for obedience?
- legitimacy of authority
- agent state
- authoritarian personality
Explain what is meant by the explanation for obedience: legitimacy of authority.
people in certain roles have control over certain situations e.g. police officers, bouncers. their legitimacy of authority is often signalled by them wearing a uniform
how can milgrams research support the idea of legitimacy of authority?
when the uniform of the researcher changed - white lab coat to everyday clothes obedience fell from 65% to 20%
Explain what is meant by the explanation for obedience: agentic state
if we interact with a authority figure we assume they have full responsibility of whatever we do - go into agentic state - as if an instrument for authority figure, stay in state because may feel rude if we disobey authority figures
how does milgrams research support the idea of the agentic state?
when pps was asked at the end why they gave electric shocks they responded with ‘I didn’t want to, he told me to do it’ supports individuals are obedient because they enter agentic state.
why is the explanation for obedience authoritarian personality dispositional?
because it focuses on an individuals personality type not situational factors
