Milgram - Social Psychology
Yes; participants were convinced of the reality of the situation, In the post-experimental interview, participants were asked: "How painful to the learner were the last few shocks you administered to him?" On a printed 14-point scale ranging from 1 ("not at all painful") to 14 ("extremely painful"), the mean was 13.42.
Did the participants in Milgram's study believe that the learner was receiving shocks?
Examples of possible evaluation points: Milgram • the majority of people obeyed so can make generalisations • Americans obeyed so can generalise beyond 'Germans are different' • but may not generalise because socialisation differs between cultures • and because some people disobeyed, so there are individual differences • replicated widely since so can make generalisations • based on narrow sample (men, American, small, etc.) originally, so initial generalisations potentially flawed • importantly may not generalise to females • based on lab study, how well does this extend to real life, so initial generalisations potentially flawed
Discuss the extent to which generalisations can be made in Milgram's study?
Data collected from observing the participants' behaviour as they gave the electric shocks to the learner and also counting how far the participants went up the electric shock generator.
Ecological validity refers to how realistic research is in terms of the situation in which participants are placed. It also refers to the tasks the participants are asked to do. Describe how the data was collected in Milgram's study?
Likely 2-mark answers: Similarities: We are asked to do things by people in positions of authority in our everyday lives (e.g. teachers, police). Students are punished in schools for getting answers wrong (e.g. being shouted at by a teacher when you get an answer wrong). The participants clearly believed in the reality of the situation as they were shaking and sweating during the study. Nazi guards did seriously harm the people in the concentration camps and the participants were asked to seriously harm the learner in the study. Differences: We don't punish people for failing a simple learning task by giving them an electric shock. We don't learn random word pairs in our everyday lives. 1 mark - participants clearly believed in reality of situation. 1 mark for a brief answer and 2 marks if it is well explained. (2 + 2)
Explain one way in which the Milgram study on obedience is similar to everyday life and one way in which it is different
Most Likely: Decided it was too unethical; inappropriate to continue. That the ends did not justify the means. That the payment was not worth it. That their conscience could not allow them to continue
From the Milgram study on obedience, give two reasons why some participants did not continue to 450 volts
Most likely: • It was done at Yale University. • It was done in a laboratory using scientific equipment. • The shock generator appeared to be real. • Teacher and learner in different room, so not face-to-face. • Any appropriate feature to receive credit. 1 mark for each feature up to 2 max.
From the study by Milgram on obedience to authority, identify two features of the setting that may have led to obedience
Most likely answers: The quantitative data collected was: • The number of Ps continuing to shock up to different shock levels from 15 volts to 450 volts. • The Ps were asked to rate the severity of the shock received by the learner on a scale of 1-14. • The number of Ps in the study who had a laughing fit was counted. • The number of Ps who had a fit/seizure was counted. The qualitative data collected in the study was: • The behaviour of the Ps observed during the study (e.g. digging fingernails into their hands). • Comments made by the Ps during the study were noted (e.g. 'The guy is suffering in there'). • 1 mark for a partial outline of both or one that is clear. 2 marks for both types of data outlined.
From the study by Milgram on obedience, a number of different methods were used to collect the data. Outline the qualitative and quantitative data gathered in this study
Example answer: To find out how the Ps felt about what they were doing to the P in the study. It showed how much they believed the situation that they were really harming someone. 1 mark for explanation and one mark for example from the study.
From the study by Milgram on obedience, a number of different methods were used to collect the data. Why was qualitative data gathered in this study?
Most likely: Specific features: • The experimenter wore a grey laboratory coat to make the study appear more scientific. • His manner was impassive and he was stern throughout. Behavioural features: • He tried to prevent withdrawal from the study by giving verbal prods. • He paid the participants. • Any appropriate feature (specific or behavioural) to receive credit. 1 mark for each feature up to 2 max.
From the study by Milgram, identify two features of the exp that may have led to obedience
Milgram put forward a number of features of the experiment which may explain why such high levels of obedience occurred even when such extreme tension was created by the procedure e.g. the experiment took place at the prestigious Yale University lent the study and procedure credibility and respect. Milgram was therefore arguing that an important factor influencing behaviour is the situation a person is in. He believes that we often make dispositional attributions about behaviour, which are incorrect. That is, we often believe a person has behaved the way they do because of their personality when in fact it was the situation which shaped their behaviour In addition, Milgram (1974) explained the behavior of his participants by suggesting that people have two states of behavior when they are in a social situation: The autonomous state - people direct their own actions, and they take responsibility for the results of those actions. The agentic state - people allow others to direct their actions and then pass off the responsibility for the consequences to the person giving the orders. In other words, they act as agents for another person's will. Milgram suggested that two things must be in place for a person to enter the agentic state: The person giving the orders is perceived as being qualified to direct other people's behavior. That is, they are seen as legitimate. The person being ordered about is able to believe that the authority will accept responsibility for what happens. Agency theory says that people will obey an authority when they believe that the authority will take responsibility for the consequences of their actions. This is supported by some aspects of Milgram's evidence. For example, when participants were reminded that they had responsibility for their own actions, almost none of them were prepared to obey. In contrast, many participants who were refusing to go on did so if the experimenter said that he would take responsibility.
How can we explain Milgram's finding?
Most likely from a long list including: 1. done at Yale University; 2. experiment has a worthy purpose - learning and memory; 3. participant has volunteered; 4. participant feels obliged; 5. participant is paid- strengthens obligation; 6. teacher-learner random so both had equal chance; 7. participants told 'painful but not dangerous'; 8. the 'prods'. 1 mark partial, 2 marks full. 2+2
In Milgram's study of obedience to authority, Milgram lists features of the experiment that explain the high amount of obedience observed. Describe two of these features.
1 mark partial: They didn't / They followed orders to hurt someone else. 2 marks: plus any evidence (eg 'all went to 300V', '26/40 went to max') Alternative answers: "they did" = 1 then either 'they followed orders' or 'they refused to give shocks (at some point, so the prods were needed)' (a good answer can still earn 2 this way)
In Milgram's study on obedience he says that we learn in childhood that it is a 'breach of moral conduct to hurt another person'. To what extent did Milgram's participants follow the moral conduct they had learned?
Most likely: People will follow orders even when this means they hurt another person even when they won't be punished even though this causes them distress Any conclusion acceptable, does not have to link to part (a). 1 mark partial, 2 marks full
In Milgram's study on obedience he says that we learn in childhood that it is a 'breach of moral conduct to hurt another person'. What did Milgram conclude?
To increase the obedience demanded by the experimenter to "bring the subject into line", i.e. to produce continued obedience even when the participant began to show signs of disobedience/tension/conscience. 1 mark partial (to make them obey), 2 marks full (expanded explanation) Also accept 'for standardisation between participants' (1 mark)
In the study by Milgram (obedience), suggest why these prods followed a sequence
Prod 1: Please continue. OR Please go on. Prod 2: The experiment requires that you continue. Prod 3: It is absolutely essential that you continue. Prod 4: You have no other choice, you must go on. 1 mark partial (1 or 2 prods not verbatim) 2 marks full (2 prods 1 verbatim, 2nd does not have to be verbatim)
In the study by Milgram (obedience), verbal prods were used. Describe two of the verbal prods
Most likely: The ends justify the means We should study 'negative' behaviour, however unpalatable We discover things about the true nature of human beings Participants are not really harmed in any study
In the study by Milgram on obedience, explain why we should conduct studies which are unethical
Most likely: 1. use of prods e.g. "please continue"; "the exp requires that you go on"; "it is absolutely essential that you continue"; "you have no other choice, you must go on" 2. Less likely but also credit things like payment, done in prestigious university. 1 mark partial (e.g. use of prods), 2 marks elaboration (e.g. use of prods such as please continue)
In the study by Milgram on obedience, how did the experimenter try to prevent participants from withdrawing from the study?
The results didn't support Milgram's hypothesis. Milgram expected that the 'Germans would be different'. He discovered that they were not, that 1960s American participants also obeyed authority.
In the study by Milgram on obedience, to what extent did the results of the study support Milgram's hypothesis?
Milgram: Helpful to police and teachers to know how to control people better, helpful for individuals to be aware of their tendency to obey and to stand up for themselves if asked to do something immoral, explains dictatorships.Describe how each of these studies is useful in helping to improve the lives of people in society.
It is important for psychological studies to be useful to help improve the lives of people in society. Describe how Milgram's study is useful in helping to improve the lives of people in society.
Most likely: pressure of situation (lab, university; received payment), role of experimenter (scientist, authority figure, giving prods). 1 mark partial (just reason), 2 marks full (reason and explanation/example, e.g. named prods). in the agentic state/not in the autonomous state did not believe they were really giving shocks; so were not concerned about their actions
Milgram (obedience) found that of the forty participants involved, fourteen stopped between 300 volts and 375 volts, and twenty six participants continued to 450 volts. Suggest one reason why some participants continued to 450 volts.
Most likely: moral conflict too strong, despite pressures e.g. ingrained tendency not to harm other people. 1 mark partial (any 1 reason or example), 2 marks full (1 reason plus expansion or an example). not in the agentic state/in the autonomous state e.g. 'too distressed; e.g. seizures, bit lip' = 2
Milgram (obedience) found that of the forty participants involved, fourteen stopped between 300 volts and 375 volts, and twenty six participants continued to 450 volts. Suggest one reason why some participants stopped before 450 volts.
Location, task lacked mundane realism, participants knew it was an experiment etc. The environment was not typical of everyday life. The task is not typical of everyday life. The participant was alone with strangers and could not discuss the situation with anyone else or seek social support for dissent. Participants did not the experimenter but in real life we are often familiar with those giving orders.
Outline two ways in which the study by Milgram on obedience was low in ecological validity
If we did not have obedience this would lead to people breaking the law in a society and the potential negative consequences of this.
Suggest one reason why obedience in society is desirable
Deception - the participants actually believed they were shocking a real person and were unaware the learner was a confederate of Milgram's. However, Milgram argued that "illusion is used when necessary in order to set the stage for the revelation of certain difficult-to-get-at-truths." Milgram also interviewed participants afterward to find out the effect of the deception. Apparently, 83.7% said that they were "glad to be in the experiment," and 1.3% said that they wished they had not been involved. Protection of participants - Participants were exposed to extremely stressful situations that may have the potential to cause psychological harm. Many of the participants were visibly distressed. Signs of tension included trembling, sweating, stuttering, laughing nervously, biting lips and digging fingernails into palms of hands. Three participants had uncontrollable seizures, and many pleaded to be allowed to stop the experiment. In his defense, Milgram argued that these effects were only short-term. Once the participants were debriefed (and could see the confederate was OK) their stress levels decreased. Milgram also interviewed the participants one year after the event and concluded that most were happy that they had taken part. However, Milgram did debrief the participants fully after the experiment and also followed up after a period of time to ensure that they came to no harm. Milgram debriefed all his participants straight after the experiment and disclosed the true nature of the experiment. Participants were assured that their behavior was common and Milgram also followed the sample up a year later and found that there were no signs of any long-term psychological harm. In fact, the majority of the participants (83.7%) said that they were pleased that they had participated. Right to Withdrawal - The BPS states that researchers should make it plain to participants that they are free to withdraw at any time (regardless of payment). Did Milgram give participants an opportunity to withdraw? The experimenter gave four verbal prods which mostly discouraged withdrawal from the experiment: Please continue. The experiment requires that you continue. It is absolutely essential that you continue. You have no other choice, you must go on. Milgram argued that they are justified as the study was about obedience so orders were necessary. Milgram pointed out that although the right to withdraw was made partially difficult, it was possible as 35% of participants had chosen to withdraw.
What are the ethical issues in Milgram's study?
Strengths - Better control over variables: Researchers had better control over the variables such as using a stooge, electric chair, prods. -Standardized: allows for easy replication Weaknesses: Low eco validity Prone to demand characteristics: Pp's were aware of being in an exp
What are the evaluation points for the type of method used in Milgram's study?
All 40 of the participants obeyed up to 300 volts at which point 5 refused to continue. Four more gave one further shock before refusing; two broke off at the 330 volts level and one each at 345, 360 and 375 volts. Therefore, a total of 14 participants defied the experimenter, and 26 obeyed. Overall, 65% of the participants gave shocks up to 450 volts (obeyed) and 35% stopped sometime before 450 volts. During the study many participants showed signs of nervousness and tension. Participants sweated, trembled, stuttered, bit their lips, groaned, dug fingernails into their flesh, and these were typical not exceptional responses. Quite a common sign of tension was nervous laughing fits (14 out of 40 participants), which seemed entirely out of place, even bizarre. Full-blown uncontrollable seizures were observed for three participants. On one occasion, a participant had such a violently convulsive seizure that the experiment had to be halted; the 46-year-old encyclopaedia salesman was extremely embarrassed. Participants took pains to point out that they were not sadistic types, and that the laughter did not mean they enjoyed shocking the learner. With few exceptions, participants were convinced of the reality of the situation, In the post-experimental interview, participants were asked: "How painful to the learner were the last few shocks you administered to him?" On a printed 14-point scale ranging from 1 ("not at all painful") to 14 ("extremely painful"), the mean was 13.42.
What are the results from Milgram's study?
Obedience is defined as a psychological mechanism which links individual action to political purpose/ Obedience is a form of social influence where an individual acts in response to a direct order from another individual, who is usually an authority figure. Obedience involves a hierarchy of power / status. Therefore, the person giving the order has a higher status than the person receiving the order. "it is the psychological mechanism which links individual action to political purpose, the dispositional cement which binds men to systems of authority."
What is the definition of obedience?
This study is often described as an experiment. However as there is no control condition (i.e. all of the participants took place in the same experimental procedure) it is not strictly speaking an experiment. The independent variable could be considered to be the prods provided by the experimenter for the participant to carry on, and the dependent variable could be considered to be the degree of obedience. That is, how far up the shock scale the participant went. It is perhaps more accurate to describe the method used as a type of controlled observation. The study collected both quantitative data in the way that it measured the amount of volts given and qualitative data in the way that Milgram observed the participants emotional responses and interviewed the participants after the study.
What type of research method was used in Milgram's study of Obedience?
The original aim of Milgram's study was to test the hypothesis 'that Germans are different', by investigating what level of obedience would be shown by subjects told to administer electric shocks by an authority figure.
What was the aim of Milgram's study?
Experimenter would explain the purpose of the study and explain the purpose of the equipment/materials used e.g. straps, electrode paste. The experimenter would assure the pp that although the shocks would be painful, they were not harmful/ would not cause permanent tissue damage. If the participant asked advice from the experimenter, whether it be; ?should I continue administering shocks?, or some other indication that he did not wish to go on, he would be given encouragement to continue with a sequence of standardised ?prods?: Prod 1: Please continue or Please go on; Prod 2: The experiment requires that you continue; Prod 3: It is absolutely essential that you continue; Prod 4:You have no other choice, you must go on. The prods were always made in sequence. Only if Prod 1 was unsuccessful could Prod 2 be used, etc. If the participant continued to disobey after Prod 4, the experiment was terminated. The experimenter's tone of voice was always firm, but not impolite. If the participant asked if the learner could suffer permanent physical injury, a special prod was used; "although the shocks may be painful, there is no permanent tissue damage, so please go on", followed by Prods 2, 3 and 4 if necessary. If the participant said that the learner did not want to go on, another special prod was used; "whether the learner likes it or not, you must go on until he has learned all the word pairs correctly, so please go on", followed by Prods 2, 3 and 4 if necessary. The experiment would end either when the 450 volt shock had been administered, or when the participant walked out.
What was the experimenters role in Milgram's study?
Learner had to pick out the correct answer which was originally paired with the word The learner's answer was communicated by pressing one of four switches which illuminated a light on top of the shock generator. In all conditions the learner gives a predetermined set of responses to the word pair test, based on a schedule of approximately three wrong answers to one correct answer. As the shocks increased, the learner responded with increasing intensity No vocal response or other sign of protest was heard from the learner until the shock level of 300 volts was reached. At this point the learner (Mr Wallace) pounded on the wall of the room and could be heard by the participant (teacher). The pounding on the wall was repeated after the 315 volt shock but subsequently the learner was not heard from, and his answers did not reappear on the panel.
What was the learner's role in Milgram's study?
The experiment took place in a psychology laboratory in Yale University. Upon arrival, volunteers were greeted by an experimenter -Jack Williams. He wore a technician's coat and appeared stern and emotionless throughout the experiment. The pp was introduced to Mr Wallace, a confederate who was trained for the role as the 'victim'/student whom most observers found mild-mannered and likeable. One participant and one victim (a confederate) were used in each trial. Experimenter told them the experiment tested the effects of punishment on learning. Pp's drew a slip of paper from the hat to see who would get the teacher's role and who would get learner's role. (both slips are fixed... both had teacher written on them). With this, the participant would always end up being a teacher and the confederate, the learner. The only thing that was not planned was the extent to which real pp would obey exp instructions. ->Teacher and learner roles? -> word pairs, 15v shocks ->use of prods The experiment would end either when the 450 volt shock had been administered, or when the participant walked out. After the exp, the pp were thoroughly debriefed using open ended q and to test that the pp were not harmed, a number of psychometric measures were used (attitude scales, projective tests) The pp was also reunited with the victim to show them that the victim was not harmed.
What was the procedure (consider ethics) for Milgram's study?
"Germans are different" hypothesis: Germans have a basic character defect to readily obey and kill.
What was the rationale behind Milgram's study?
To read word pairs which the learner was expected to memorise. e.g. Blue- girl, Nice- day Teacher repeated the first word and provided four possible answers. If learner produced correct answer -> proceed to the next word incorrect answer -> administer electric shock The severity of shocks increase by 15v every time the learner gave the wrong answer Before giving the shocks, teacher had to announce the voltage level. The participant (teacher) was instructed to treat the absence of a response as a wrong answer and to shock the learner according to the usual schedule, allowing 5 to 10 seconds before considering no response as a wrong answer.
What was the teacher's role in Milgram's study?
To help complete a scientific study of memory and learning
What were participants told the purpose of the experiment was?
The independent variable could be considered to be the prods provided by the experimenter for the participant to carry on. The dependent variable was the degree of obedience, measured by how far up the shock scale the participant went.
What were the IVs and DVs of Milgram's study?
Before the experiment Milgram asked 14 senior Psychology students and 40 psychiatrists to predict if 100 participants would continue administering shocks beyond 300 volt shock. More specifically, they were instructed to plot the distribution of obedience of "100 Americans of diverse occupations, and ranging in age from 20 to 50 years" Many predicted that minority (0 to 3 percent) would proceed
Who did Milgram ask to make predictions about the study? What were the predictions?
40 Males American Ages 20-50 from New Haven Different occupation and educational background Volunteers were recruited through advertising in newspapers and direct mail.
Who were the participants in Milgram's Obedience study and how were they recruited?
Most likely: • For each participant the study lasts for 'no more than an hour of your time'. Some participants will be involved for significantly less than this. • It is not a longitudinal study because it does not track the development of any individual over a period of time. 1 mark for snapshot and 1 mark for longitudinal components.
Why would Milgram's study be described as snapshot rather than longitudinal?