Situational variables affecting obedience -A-Level Psychology

Obedience-refers to a type of social influence whereby someone acts in response to a direct order from a figure of authority

Key study:Milgram(1963)

Aim:to see how far one remains obedient in increasingly high pressure situations

Procedure:

-There were 40 participants at a time over a series of conditions.There were two experimental confederates and a volunteer participant.There was a rigged draw so that the volunteer was always the teacher and the confederate was the learner.The other confederate was the experimenter. The teacher had to test the learner on their ability to remember word pairs. For each answer that was wrong ,the teacher had to administer an increasingly  powerful electric shock(15v to 450v). There was a screen between them. 

-In the voice feedback study, the learner sat in a different room and gave mostly wrong answers and received fake shocks in silence until they reached the 300v level.The learner pounded the wall and gave no response to the next question.When the teacher asked to stop,the experimenter had a series of prods they would repeat e.g ’it is absolutely essential that you continue’.

Findings:

Before the study ,Milgram asked experts to predict how long participants would go before refusing to continue.They said that most people would not go beyond 150v and that 1/1000 would administer 450v.However, all participants continued to 300v with only 12.5% stopping at 300v and 65% of participants continued to 450v even though there were danger labels present.

Milgram’s research demonstrated that ordinary people are astonishingly obedient even when asked to do something that goes against their own morality.His research appeared to suggest that it is not evil people who commit atrocities but ordinary people who are obeying orders.

Qualitative data was also collected e.g observations that showed that participants had extreme tensions such as sweating.

Situational factors in obedience:

-are external circumstances that influence the level of obedience

-Milgram carried out variations of the initial study.

1)Proximity-both teacher and learner were sat in the same room.Obedience levels fell to 40% as the teacher was able to directly see the consequences of their actions.In another variation the experimenter gave instructions from a telephone in another room,the vast majority defied the experimenter with only 21% continuing to 450v and also faking the level of shocks given.In a touch proximity condition,obedience dropped to 30%.

2)Location-The study was carried out at Yale university,this location gave participants confidence that the study was legit and they trusted the experimenters more.Another study was carried out at a less prestigious location in a run down office,obedience rates dropped slightly to 48% administering the 450v.

3)Uniform-Uniform can convey power and authority and this impacts obedience.In the original study the experimenter wore a lab coat.In one variation the experimenter was called away and the role was taken over by someone wearing ordinary clothes.Obedience dropped to 20%.

Evaluation:

Ethical issues-Diana Baumrind(1964) criticised the lack of concern for the wellbeing of the participants in the study.They were deceived about the aims of the study so were not able to provide informed consent.Although the participants had the right to withdraw,the prods given by the experimenter contradicted this.

Supporting studies-Hofling et al(1966) studied nurses on a hospital ward and found that the level of obedience to unjustified demands by doctors were very high,21/22 nurses obeyed.This shows that process of obeying authority in Milgram’s study can be generalised to other situations.

Milgram’s findings have been replicated in a variety of cultures and most lead to the same conclusions as Milgram’s original study and in some cases see higher obedience rates.The majority of these studies have been conducted in industrialized Western cultures so aren’t generalisable as a universal trait.

Milgram’s study cannot be seen as representative of the American population as his sample was self-selected. This is because they became participants only by electing to respond to a newspaper advertisement (selecting themselves). They may also have a typical “volunteer personality” – not all the newspaper readers responded so perhaps it takes this personality type to do so.