Milgrams (1963) Original Obedience Study

Aim
To find out how far someone would go and obey an authority figure
To see if an ordinary person would follow orders even if it meant breaking
their ethical code
To establish a baseline measure of how obedient nave participants would
be when ordered to administer increasingly intense electric shocks to an
innocent victim
To test the idea that Germans were different when they carried out orders
to persecute Jews during WWII
Procedure from the point where lots were drawn to decide who would be the
teacher and who would be the learner.

They were shown the shock generator with 30 switches each showing a 15
volts increase in shock level from the last
The teacher was given a sample shock of 45 volts to demonstrate the
shock was real
Both men were shown the next room in which was the chair where the
learner (Mr Wallace) was to be strapped. The teacher watched Mr Wallace
being strapped into the chair
At this point the two men were separated and the experiment began, with
the participant being instructed to issue a shock each time the learner got
an answer wrong
Only one in every four answers was right and there was a predetermined
set of responses from the learner complaining about the shocks
Mr. Wallace began to complain about his heart and demanded to be let
out, refusing to take further part
At the 300 volts level he pounded on the wall. He repeated this at the 315
volts level but from then on was silent
The experimenter delivered a standardised sequence of verbal prods to
encourage the teacher to continue
1 mark for a suitable example from: please continue/ please go on/
the experiment requires that you continue/it is absolutely essential that
you continue/you have no other choice, you must go on
They were also reassured by the experimenter that no permanent tissue
damage was being caused by the shocks

Applications to real life

Milgram has demonstrated how easy it is to follow the route to destructive
obedience and this knowledge may lead to avoidance of such incidents in
the future
His findings have been used by the US military to change the way they
train their recruits
The findings can help explain events such as WWII and why so many
soldiers obeyed authority to kill innocent Jews. It can be said the soldiers
were not responsible and were just following orders from Hitler who was
making them obey
 It explains why children obey parents who they perceive as an authority
figure because they have more knowledge /power/ society expects this

Reasons why the participants obeyed

Buffers (e.g. the wall) prevented those who obey from being aware of the
full impact of their actions
Held at Yale University, which is a prestigious university,so participants
thought researchers were seen as experts and trustworthy
Generator switches only went up in small increments (15 volts), not a big
jump, so participants found it easier to obey
Many participants asked whose responsibility it was if the learner was
harmed and showed visible relief when the experimenter took
responsibility
Prods/prompts such as You must continue, the experiment requires that
you continue
The experimenter was seen as a legitimate authority figure in Milgrams
study and he wore a grey lab coat to indicate his position
They were in an agentic state and gave up their own free will to obey the
authority figure
The cues in the experimental setting influenced the participants
perceptions of what was required of them (demand characteristics) such
as the setting of a prestigious university (2nd mark)

Explain how Milgrams study could be seen as ethical.

Milgram did not expect the participants to obey based on his initial survey
of colleagues and students which suggested very few (only 1/1000) would
go to 450v
All ps were debriefed and made aware learner was in fact safe (met Mr.
Wallace afterwards)
Participants examined by psychiatrists a year after the experiment who
found no harmful effects
In a follow up survey most (84%) of participants said they were glad to
have taken part in the experiment
No ethical problems as participants were not actually forced to do
anything
Milgram said he did not think 'stress' was serious but 'momentary
excitement'
A volunteer sample was used making it more ethical because all
participants in this way gave consent to take part
Milgram was competent enough to carry out the study and had the
necessary training to do this
Participants were told before the study started they could withdraw from
the experiment and still keep the money
Technically participants could withdraw from the study despite the
prompts
Explain how Milgrams study could be seen as unethical.
Deception
Participants were deceived over the nature of the study they thought
experiment to be on learning and memory not obedience
Also deceived by thinking other participant (Mr. Wallace)was also nave
and really getting electric shocks
Milgram defends his actions as without deception the study would not
have worked / revealed why people obey
Right To Withdraw
The study abused the rights of participants to withdraw many wishing to
leave were told to continue
Despite being told at the start of the experiment that they had the right to
withdraw, the prods and prompts made it difficult for the participants to
actively withdraw
However Milgram would argue they were not physically restrained and
designed many variations to increase refusal / disobedience
Informed Consent
although ps gave consent it can be argued they did not give informed
consent as they were not fully aware of what was involved
the ps had volunteered to take part in a study of learning not obedience
Distress
The study caused considerable distress to the participants through
feelings of guilt and loss of self esteem
However all participants were fully debriefed and in a follow up survey a
year later 84% (most) were glad to have been involved

Milgram controlled situational variables in his 1963 original study of obedience.

Explain why this is a strength of Milgrams (1963) original study of obedience.

The procedure is easy to replicate and can therefore be tested for

reliability
Control over variables such as the word pair task in a controlled
setting means it can be replicated
Control over variables such as the word pair task in a controlled setting
means the procedure can be replicated and tested for reliability
 The verbal prods were standardised throughout which means the
procedure can be replicated and tested for reliability

Methodological weaknesses.

Lacks ecological validity as it took place in Yale University which is an

artificial environment for these participants and so does not represent real
life
Lacks (task) validity/(mundane) realism, as giving electric shocks is not a
normal everyday activity so does not represent a real life behaviour
Procedure may be prone to demand characteristics as participants may
have guessed nature of experiment due to cues in the setting
The sample was all American and male which makes it difficult to
generalise to other cultures and could therefore be seen as ethnocentric /
androcentric
A volunteer/self-selected sample was used which means the participants
may have been more motivated and therefore more obedient to the
instructions given by the experimenter

They were upset by what they were doing and knew that it was wrong.
(Source: adapted from Milgram, 1963)
Milgrams participants were upset by continuing to do something they disagreed
with.
Describe the feature of agency theory that the quote refers to.
Moral Strain
the pressure of doing something against ones feelings of right and wrong
When we do something which we believe to be immoral in order to
function as an agent of (benefit) society/greater good
We use defence mechanisms to avoid the distress of having to perform
acts which would normally find difficult
E.g. denial was common in soldiers during the Holocaust as they refused
to confront what they were doing
E.g. Milgrams participants showed signs of distress (moral strain) when
being asked to continue giving shocks