Milgram's Study of Destructive Obedience (1963) Evaluation

HideShow resource information
  • Created by: Asma8901
  • Created on: 21-05-16 11:56
View mindmap
  • Milgram's Study of Destructive Obedience (1963)
    • Ethical Considerations
      • Deception
        • Told P's that the experiment was on 'Memory and punishment'
          • Experiment was on destructive obedience.
            • Using deception means no Demand Characteristics so true behaviour was shown by P's
      • Distress
        • Distress was caused during the experiment when P's were ordered and prodded to give shocks to the 'learner'
          • Signs of Distress
            • Sweating, biting lips and stuttering
              • 14 P's giggled nervously
                • One had a severe seizure that the procedure had to be stopped.
      • Debrief
        • P's were debriefed and interviewed.
    • The research method
      • Lab experiment so it's a highly controlled setting
        • Reliable as procedure is standardised.
        • May not be as valid as it's an artificial setting - Ecological validity.
    • Sampling Bias
      • 40 men from the same region in the USA
        • Self-selected sample so it's   unrepresentative.
          • Not typical people.
        • Hard to generalise
          • Gender bias = All men
    • Reliability
    • Quantitative and qualitative data
      • Milgram collected both qualitative and quantitative data.
        • Qualitative data - experience during experiment. (look at ethics section)
          • Qualitative data - in depth data of P's thoughts an feelings but it would be hard to analyse and compare results.
        • Quantitative data - Number of voltages that P's went up to.
          • Quantitative data - easy to analyse and compare results but not enough detail on P's thoughts and feelings.
    • Validity
      • Could be valid as there was a authority figure present and the setting was of an authority - lab
      • Lab - artificial setting = Lack of ecological validity
  • Milgram's study is reliable as there is a standardised procedure.
    • This means that it could be replicated.
    • Reliability
  • Allows the International Criminal Court in some cases to predict atrocities before they take place.
    • (Alexander, 2009)
    • Useful in understanding atrocities
      • Practical Applications
        • Milgram's Study of Destructive Obedience (1963)
          • Ethical Considerations
            • Deception
              • Told P's that the experiment was on 'Memory and punishment'
                • Experiment was on destructive obedience.
                  • Using deception means no Demand Characteristics so true behaviour was shown by P's
            • Distress
              • Distress was caused during the experiment when P's were ordered and prodded to give shocks to the 'learner'
                • Signs of Distress
                  • Sweating, biting lips and stuttering
                    • 14 P's giggled nervously
                      • One had a severe seizure that the procedure had to be stopped.
            • Debrief
              • P's were debriefed and interviewed.
          • The research method
            • Lab experiment so it's a highly controlled setting
              • Reliable as procedure is standardised.
              • May not be as valid as it's an artificial setting - Ecological validity.
          • Sampling Bias
            • 40 men from the same region in the USA
              • Self-selected sample so it's   unrepresentative.
                • Not typical people.
              • Hard to generalise
                • Gender bias = All men
          • Quantitative and qualitative data
            • Milgram collected both qualitative and quantitative data.
              • Qualitative data - experience during experiment. (look at ethics section)
                • Qualitative data - in depth data of P's thoughts an feelings but it would be hard to analyse and compare results.
              • Quantitative data - Number of voltages that P's went up to.
                • Quantitative data - easy to analyse and compare results but not enough detail on P's thoughts and feelings.
          • Validity
            • Could be valid as there was a authority figure present and the setting was of an authority - lab
            • Lab - artificial setting = Lack of ecological validity

Comments

No comments have yet been made

Similar Psychology resources:

See all Psychology resources »See all Core studies resources »