Dog chair Star hat Table cloud Bear flower Hat moon Man sky Bush sofa Grass

a Grass arm Rabbit pen Hand plate

Sea book Cow hill Cupboard cat Air paper River shelf Foot wall Leaf eye Hair carpet Bed fish Roof bag

You need to: Describe in detail Milgrams research into obedience including variations and what they show. Outline other research including field studies and relate these to Milgrams conclusions. Evaluate Milgrams research in terms of its validity and ethical issues.

Obedience to authority
Milgram (1963)

To investigate whether ordinary people (not just German soldiers the 'Germans are different' hypothesis) will obey a legitimate authority even when required to injure another person i.e. obedience to unjust authority.

40 males volunteered for learning experiment at Yale University, given role of teacher and asked to administer shocks to learner (a confederate). As shocks increased, teacher encouraged to continue despite pre-arranged objections from learner ('experimenter' script e.g. the experiment requires that you continue.) Participants told at start they were free to leave.

Psychology students interviewed before experiment estimated less than 1% would go to the maximum level (450 volts). In fact 65% of participants continued to maximum (showing signs of distress). Only 5 participants (12.5%) stopped at 300 volts, the point at which the learner first objected.

Ordinary people are obedient to unjust authority. This suggests that it is not evil people who commit evil crimes, but ordinary people who are just obeying orders. A situational rather than dispositional explanation for obedience. People enter an 'agentic state' where they give up control over their actions. Graduated commitment is also important.

Variations on Milgram

Variations on Milgram

(1) Demand characteristics may have led to unnaturally high obedience, e.g. prestigious University setting. (did participants really believe the deception?) (2) Individual differences not everyone was obedient (population/historical effect?)

What do variations on the original Milgram experiment suggest about the psychological processes involved in obedience to authority?

What do variations on the original Milgram experiment suggest about the psychological processes involved in obedience to authority?

Sheridan and King (1972)

Sheridan and King (1972) Students trained puppy using real electric shocks these were small but they could see it and hear its squeals. 75% continued administering shocks after the puppy lost consciousness (actually due to anaesthetic gas).

Hofling et al. (1966)

Hofling et al. (1966) Findings: 21 out of 22 nurses obeyed instructions from unknown doctor over phone for unknown drug (Astroten). Said afterwards they obeyed because expected to obey doctors. Conclusions: Obedience does occur in real situations, though Rank and Jacobsen (1975) found nurses less obedient when allowed to discuss action and drug known.

Bickman (1974)

Bickman (1974) Procedures: Actor dressed as policeman, milkman or casually gave orders in the street e.g. you can't stand there, give this man a quarter. Findings: Pedestrians more likely to obey man in uniform, even a milkman! Conclusions: People more likely to obey someone who appears to be in authority.

Evaluate Milgrams research into obedience in terms of its validity and ethical issues. (12 marks)

Meeus and Raajmakers (1995) Findings: 22 out of 24 participants acting as interviewers continued to put pressure on interviewees, even when they complained. Conclusions: High obedience in face-to-face setting.

Mandel (1998) Findings: Officers of Reserve Police Battalion 101 in Poland in World War II obeyed orders to kill Jews despite close proximity, absence of authority figure, and presence of disobedient peers. Conclusions: Other factors influence obedience in real life.