1. Milgram (1963) Study on Obedience AICE AS Level Psychology Lecture 1
“This presentation contains copyrighted material under the educational fair use exemption to the U.S. copyright law”

2. I. The Social Approach A. Social Approach
1. Defined- looks to explain human behavior through social interaction & perceptions of others
2. Strengths of the Social Approach
a.. can help to explain behavior in social situations
b. tends to be holistic in looking at different levels of explanations

3. I. The social approach 3. Weaknesses of the Social Approach
a. results often lack generalizability depending on culture, race, socio-economic status, etc.
b. issues of controlling variables as examining social behavior is complex
c. issues of distinguishing between situational and dispositional explanations

4. I. The Social Approach B. Key Terms
1. Obedience or (submissive compliance) is the act of obeying orders from a superior
2. Compliance is when a person acts on the explicit request of peers
3. Conformity is when a person acts with the intention of his behavior matching that of the majority

5. I. The Social approach
4. The inclination toward obedient behavior has been regarded as a personality trait
5. A situational attribution is one which explains people’s behavior as being impacted or even controlled by environmental factors
6. A dispositional attribution is one which explains people’s behavior as coming from within and under their control

6. II. Background
A. The GADH (Germans Are Different Hypothesis)- A popular explanation of why the Holocaust could only have happened in Germany.
1. Hitler could not have put his plans into place without the cooperation of thousands of others.
2. Therefore Germans must have a basic character defect (a readiness to follow orders) that allowed Hitler to be successful

7. B. Why this research is important
1. Milgram said that “obedience is the psychological mechanism that links individual action to political purpose.
2. It is the dispositional element that binds men to systems of authority
3. Milgram quotes CP Snow who states that “more hideous crimes have been committed in the name of obedience than have ever been committed in the name of rebellion

8. III. Study Basics
A. Aim
1. To investigate what level of obedience would be shown when participants were told by an authority figure to administer electric shocks to another person
2. This study was conducted as a PILOT study for one that Milgram intended to carry out in Germany
3. He believed that he would have lower levels of obedience in the US than in Germany

9. 2. Variables
a. Independent Variables (IV) = for Milgram there is NO true IV.
b. Dependent Variables (DV) = Level of shock administered by the teacher (participant)
3. Method – Can be considered a “lab experiment” however there is no manipulation of the IV so not a true experiment
4. Design – There is no design

10. III. Study Basics B. Sample
white males aged 20 – 50 from New Haven CT and the surrounding area (Yale University)
a. Wide range of education levels from one who did not complete elementary school to those with PhD’s
b. 15 skilled or unskilled laborers, 16 white collar or salesmen and 9 professionals
c. They answered ads in a newspaper for a Yale study on memory and learning.
d. They were paid $4.50 for their participation for participation and .50 for travel

11. Occupation
20-29
30-39
40-50
% total Occupations
Workers, skilled and unskilled 4 5 6
37.5
Sales, business and white collar 3 7
40.0
Professional 1
22.5
% of total (age) 20 40

12. Recruiting advertisement for the Milgram Study

13. IV. Procedure A. The setup
1. Greeted by “Jack Williams” a stooge or confederate playing the role of a lab tech in a grey lab coat with (NO CLIPBOARD only in video).
a. Really he was a local high school biology teacher
b. Who was instructed to act rather stern throughout the study

14. IV. Procedure
2. Introduced to Mr. Wallace, the ‘learner’ (also a stooge or confederate), a likeable 47 year old accountant who had arrived first
3. Entire set was preplanned, staged and scripted except for responses of the ‘teacher’.
4. The study was explained to the subject as an experimentation on the role of punishment in learning

15. Script read at the beginning
But actually, we know very little about the effect of punishment on learning, because almost no truly scientific studies have been made of it in human beings. For instance, we don't know how much punishment is best for learning—and we don't know how much difference it makes as to who is giving the punishment, whether an adult learns best from a younger or an older person than himself—or many things of that sort. So in this study we are bringing together a number of adults of different occupations and ages. And we're asking some of them to be teachers and some of them to be learners. We want to find out just what effect different people have on each other as teachers and learners, and also what effect punishment will have on learning in this situation. Therefore, I'm going to ask one of you to be the teacher here tonight and the other one to be the learner. Does either of you have a preference?

16. IV. Procedure B. “Learning”
1. Confederate’s task was to memorize pairs of words.
2. When tested, the "learner/confederate" would indicate his answer using a system of lights.
3. The "teacher/subject’s" role was to administer a shock every time the learner made a mistake.
4. Each mistake would earn a progressively more powerful shock.

17. Cue Questions
Cue 1: Refer to the Oxford Revision guide and define the term pilot study and explain why an experimenter might conduct one.
Cue 2: How is this study an example of the social approach
Cue 3. Explain 1 advantage of the Social Approach using Milgram as an example
Cue 4: Explain 1 disadvantage of the Social Approach using Milgram as an example

18. Milgram (1963) Study on Obedience AICE AS Level Psychology Lecture 2
“This presentation contains copyrighted material under the educational fair use exemption to the U.S. copyright law”

19. IV. Procedure C. Administering the shock
1. The participant watched the confederate being strapped into a chair in an adjoining room with electrodes attached to his arms

20. IV Procedure
2. The subject sat in front of the shock generator (APPARATUS) had 30 levers, each of which indicated the level of shock to be given.

21. IV Procedure
3. Levers labeled from “Slight Shock” to “Danger: Severe Shock” XXX
4. The “teachers” were given a shock of 45 volts to convince them that the shocks were real
5. For every mistake made, a shock given and shocks proceeded in intensity.
6. Teacher was to announce the shock level each time.

22. The set up looked something like this
E = Experimenter
T = Teacher
L = Learner
Notice the learner is in a different room from the teacher

23. IV. Procedure
7. The “learner’s” response to the questions was scripted and played back on a tape recorder

24. IV. Procedure E. “Learner Feedback”
1. Prior to 300 volts the “learner” made statements indicating he was experiencing discomfort and even reported a heart problem.
2. Then at 300 volts the learner pounded on the wall of the other room which could be heard by the subject
3. From this point on, the learner no longer answered
4. The learner's pounding was repeated at 315 volts
5. After this point, the learner made no more sounds or protests

25. Know the prods verbatim
IV. Procedure
Know the prods verbatim
F. Instructions to the “teacher” or subject.
1. If the subject objected to continuing
2. Then the Experimenter prompts:
a. Please continue (or “Please go on”)
b. The experiment requires that you continue
c. It is absolutely essential that you continue
d. You have no other choice, you must go on

26. IV. Procedure
3. If the P refused four times in a row to continue, he would be done with the experiment. However, if he refused and then continued shocking, it would reset.
4. The experiment continued either until the subject refused to continue or until 450 volts were reached and given four times
5. The participant was then debriefed and taken to meet the confederate

27. V. Results A. Quantitative Results B. Qualitative Results
1. All participants went to at least 300 volts on the shock generator
% of participants went to the end and believed they had administered the full 450 volts
3. Average was 368 volts
B. Qualitative Results
1. the amount of stress and tension clearly observed in the participants.

28. Quantitative Results Level of Shock # that quit 300 5 315 4 330 2 345
360
375
390
405
420
435
450 26

29. V. Results
2. Most participants found the procedure very stressful & wanted to stop.
3. Signs of anxiety included sweating, trembling, stuttering, biting their lips, groaning, digging their fingernails into their flesh, and having of nervous laughing fit.
4. 3 subjects had seizures

30. V. Results 5. Remarks from two subjects:
a. “Is he banging? Is he hurt out there? Well, I don’t want to be responsible for anything that happens to him. No, I can’t go on with it. I don’t know whether he’s all right or not. I mean he may have a heart condition or something. I wouldn’t feel right doing it….I don’t see any sense to this…I just can’t see it”
b. “You want me to keep going? You hear him hollering? What if something happens to him? I refuse to take responsibility….”

31. Cues
Cue 5: From the Oxford review book discuss the difference between experimental realism and mundane realism?
Cue 6: What steps did the experimenters take to ensure this study had as much experimental realism as possible?
Cue 7: How do we know they were successful?
Cue 8: What is 1 strength and 1 weakness of using qualitative data
Cue 9. From the article on page 374 explain why the preliminary test was given

32. Milgram (1963) Study on Obedience AICE AS Level Psychology Lecture 3
“This presentation contains copyrighted material under the educational fair use exemption to the U.S. copyright law”

33. VI. Conclusions A. Predicted results
Yale Seniors, all psych majors were asked to predict how 100 “average Americans” mirroring the sample would behave
2. The most pessimistic of the 14 estimated that 3 of 100 would go all the way to 450
3. Also posed informally to colleagues, all who expected low obedience

34. VI. Conclusions B. More Conclusions
1. Under certain circumstances, most people will obey orders that go against their conscience
2. When people occupy a subordinate position in a dominance hierarchy, they become liable to lose feelings of empathy, compassion and morality, and are inclined towards blind obedience
3. Atrocities (WWII) may be largely explained in terms of pressures to obey a powerful authority

35. C. According 2 Milgram “Two findings that were surpising”
1. Amount of obedience
a. “We learn from childhood that it is a breach of moral conduct to harm another.”
b. Yet subjects violated this code by shocking others
2. Extreme tension

36. VII. Factors Impacting Obedience
A. The fact that the experiment took place at the prestigious Yale University lent the study and procedure credibility and respect.
1. In one follow up study Milgram moved the study to an abandoned office bldg and the rate dropped to 47%
B. The participant believed that the experiment was for a worthy purpose - to advance knowledge and understanding of learning processes.

37. VII. Factors Effecting Obedience
43 undergrads were run through the exp w/o pay and the results were very similar
VII. Factors Effecting Obedience
C. The participant believed the confederate had volunteered to be in the study and therefore had an obligation to take part even if the procedures become unpleasant
D. The participant felt himself to be similarly obligated to take part in the procedures as planned
E. Being paid increased the sense of obligation.
F. Believed the roles of learner and teacher had been assigned fairly

38. VII. Factors Effecting Obedience
G. Had never been a participant in an experiment before:
1. Did not know the rights
2. Had no norms
H. They were told that the shocks were ‘painful but not dangerous’
I. (ends justifying means) This short- term pain was balanced with the possibility of long-term scientific gain.
I. Learner responded to all of the questions until the 300 volts indicating a willingness to take part in the study.

39. VIII. Evaluation A. Ethics 1. Unethical because a. Deception
i. Milgram deceived the participants about the nature and reality of the shocks
Ii. Was there any other way to get valid results?
b. Harm – (physical/psychological) They could have suffered long term shock as a result of their realization of their willingness to shock someone else.

40. VIII. Evaluation 2. Ethical because a. Right to Withdrawal
i. Milgram told the participants that they could quit at the beginning of the experiment and the money was still theirs
ii. However, the prods he used made this unethical because it was implied that the person could not quit
b. Debriefing or “dehoaxing” was used

41. VIII. Evaluations B. Sampling C. Ecological validity
Look back at self-selecting samples to think of other weaknesses for this sample
VIII. Evaluations
B. Sampling
1. Ethnocentric - Only American men (white)
2. Only people who saw and responded to the advertisement.
a. However, several studies have replicated the results across cultures.
C. Ecological validity
1. Ecological validity is the degree to which the behaviors observed and recorded in a study reflect the behaviors that actually occur in natural settings.

42. VIII. Evaluation
b. Ecological validity is associated with "generalizability". Essentially this is the extent to which findings (from a study) can be generalized (or extended) to the "real world".
c. In virtually all studies there is a trade- off between experimental control and ecological validity. .

43. d. Ecological validity and the Milgram study
1. Carried out in an artificial environment which would limit the eco. Validity. However other studies that were less artificial found similar results. One involved nurses and lethal injections and the other involved actual electric shocks to puppies
2. However, high levels of experimental realism as the P’s believed they were actually shocking the learner (what proof of this is there?)

44. VIII. Evaluation D. Controls
1. Participants believed that roles were assigned randomly.
2. Believed they were actually administering shock
3. Same apparatus and set-up
4. Same commands and prods from experimenter.
E. Another strength was that he collected both quantitative and qualitative data.

45. X. Interesting Asides
The “learner”, Mr. McDonough, died of a heart attack three years after the studies ended. His neighbor, who unsuccessfully tried to revive him using mouth-to-mouth resuscitation, had been a “teacher” in the Milgram studies and had administered “shocks” to Mr. McDonough just a few years earlier.

46. X. Interesting Asides
One of the “teachers” (who had gone all the way to 450 volts) was invited into a social psychology class to speak about his experience in the study. The students (who had already learned about the study) were nearly silent and stared at him with accusing and disbelieving eyes. He reminded the class that you never know what you might have done in that situation.
“Beyond the Shock Machine” - Gina Perry

47. Cues
Cue 9: List 3 reasons for the high level of obedience among the participants
Cue 10: Milgram is often considered one of the most unethical experiments in history. List 1 advantage and 1 disadvantage of conducting unethical experiments
Cue 11. To what extent was the behavior of the subjects dispositional
2 ways it was
2 ways it wasn’t