milgrams study into obedience
Describe and discuss two factors that Milgram found effect obedience? Refer to empirical evidence in your answer
Milgram’s original study into obedience came under to a lot of scrutiny because of both mythological and ethical problems. This meant that the validity of Milgram’s study was put into question. Following the study were further investigations to see what might change and explain the results that Milgram found, both by Milgram himself and other psychologists. Variations to his study throw up interesting theories to the situational and dispositional factors that might affect levels of obedience.
One variation of Milgram’s study investigated the role that buffers may have on the level of obedience of a individual. Two experiments were carried out; one changing the proximity of the authority figure and the other changing the proximity to the victim. By getting the naive participant to physically force the victims hand onto an electric shock plate the participant was closer to the consequences of their actions. This meant that emotional factor were likely to occur. The percentage of people who administered the 420 volt shock dropped from the original 63% to 30%. The level of obedience to the authority figure has decreased.
The other side of this is changing the proximity of the authority figure to the participant. When Milgram phoned in the instructions to shock the stooge the obedience dropped dramatically to only 20.5% giving the high voltage shocks. Participants were found to cheat saying that they had administered the shock when they had not, while some opted to give a lower shock. However, this set of results can be put into question as Hofling (1966) found contrasting results with a higher level of ecological validly. A naturalistic study was carried out to investigate the obedience of nurses when orders were sent by phone by a unknown doctor. Taking these orders would go against 5 significant hospital rules. 21 out of 22 nurses obeyed. This
Milgram’s original study into obedience came under to a lot of scrutiny because of both mythological and ethical problems. This meant that the validity of Milgram’s study was put into question. Following the study were further investigations to see what might change and explain the results that Milgram found, both by Milgram himself and other psychologists. Variations to his study throw up interesting theories to the situational and dispositional factors that might affect levels of obedience.
One variation of Milgram’s study investigated the role that buffers may have on the level of obedience of a individual. Two experiments were carried out; one changing the proximity of the authority figure and the other changing the proximity to the victim. By getting the naive participant to physically force the victims hand onto an electric shock plate the participant was closer to the consequences of their actions. This meant that emotional factor were likely to occur. The percentage of people who administered the 420 volt shock dropped from the original 63% to 30%. The level of obedience to the authority figure has decreased.
The other side of this is changing the proximity of the authority figure to the participant. When Milgram phoned in the instructions to shock the stooge the obedience dropped dramatically to only 20.5% giving the high voltage shocks. Participants were found to cheat saying that they had administered the shock when they had not, while some opted to give a lower shock. However, this set of results can be put into question as Hofling (1966) found contrasting results with a higher level of ecological validly. A naturalistic study was carried out to investigate the obedience of nurses when orders were sent by phone by a unknown doctor. Taking these orders would go against 5 significant hospital rules. 21 out of 22 nurses obeyed. This