Social Influence(situational variables affecting obedience)

Question 1

Milgram - procedure

Answer 1

• 40 participants
• Involved over series of conditions
• Participants were told it was about how punishment affects learning.
• Two experimental confederates:
• An experimenter
• A man who was introduced as a volunteer participant.
• Each two individual participants were drawn to see who was the learner and teacher but it was rigged and the real participant was always the teacher and the fake was always the learner.
• Teacher tested them on their ability to remember word pairs.
• Every question wrong resulted in a administered electric shock.
• Started at 15 volts, went all the way up to 450 volts in 15 volt increments.
• They received fake shocks.
• If they asked to leave they were convinced to stay by the experimenter, by saying it is essential you continue, or you have no choice you must go on.

Question 2

Milgram findings -

Answer 2

• 26 of 40 (65%) continued to the maximum shock level. (450 volts) Even if the shock generator said danger level: severe shock!
• All participants went to minimum of 300 volts. With 12.5% stopping there.
• College students believed many wouldn’t go above 150 volts and 1 in 1,000 would administer 450 volts.

Question 3

Internal validity - lack of realism

Answer 3

Claimed that participants in psychological studies have learnt to disrupt experimenters as they may know the main true purpose of the study may be disguised. Sperry discovered may of the individuals were sceptical about whether or not the shocks were being administered. Murata divided the individuals into 2 groups of doubter and believers. He found that it was the latter group who only expressed low intensity shocks. Therefore this questions the internal validity of whether or not the input of the individuals was genuine as did they believe it was really or not may tampered to the results.

Question 4

Situational factors in obedience - Proximity

Answer 4

Proximity study - resulted in learner and teacher being in the same room. Obedience levels fell to 40% .
- In some instances the the teacher was required to put the learners hand on the shock plate, in the touch proximity condition it dropped to a rate of 30%
-In a experiment where the experimenter wasn’t present, the vast majority defied the experimenter with only 21% going to the maximum shock level.

Question 5

Situational factors in obedience - Location

Answer 5

• Original studies were carried out in Yale university, where the participants were confident in the integrity of the people involved and due to its location.
• Milgram moved his study to a run-down office in Bridgeport to assess the effects of location on obedience. Obedience rates dropped from the original 65% of people administering the 450 volt max shock, to 48% of people delivering the 450 volt max shock.

Question 6

Situational factors in obedience - The power of Uniform

Answer 6

Bushman carried out a study, where a female researcher, dressed in either a police uniform, business executive or beggar, stopped people in the street and asked them to give change to a male researcher for an expired parking meter. The results of obedience showed:
- 72% of people obeyed when she was in Uniform
- 48% as business executive
-52% as a beggar

Question 7

Historical (temporal) validity - would the same thing happen today?

Answer 7

Milgram’s study in current psychology may be overlooked as it was carried over more than 50 years ago. Burger in 2009 found no more or no less obedience levels than one conducted earlier in time like Milgram’s 1963 research. This suggest that Milgram’s research does have temporal validity and show they do still apply today as much as they did over 50 years ago.