Evaluating situational variables affecting obedience

?

Evaluating situational variables affecting obedience

Advantages

  • Research support - Bickman had three confederates in different uniforms ask passers-by to perform certain tasks. They were twice as likely to obey the “security guard” than the “office worker”. This supports the idea that uniform and other situational variables influence obedience.
  • Cross cultural replication - Meeus and Raaijmakers used a similar study using Dutch participants. They found that 90% of participants obeyed the command to ask stressful questions in a job interview. This also reflected Milgram’s proximity variable. This shows that Milgram’s data is valid across cultures and gender.

Disadvantages

  • Countering cross-cultural validity - Only two replications of Milgram’s baseline study occurred outside of western cultures (India and Jordan). Other countries such as Spain, Australia and Scotland have similar notions of authority and obedience to the US. This shows that Milgram’s findings are ethnocentric and cannot be applied to non-western culture.
  • Low internal validity - more likely in the variations of Milgram’s research. The proximity variation in which the researcher is replaced by a “member of the public” is far fetched and unlikely to have been valid. Many participants would have guessed the true aims at this point and their behaviour subject to demand characteristics.
  • Danger of situational perspective - Mandel says that situational variables provide an alibi or reason for an individual to carry out atrocities. Milgram also ignored dispositions factors.

Evaluation

Overall the situational variables are not a good way to study obedience. They are extremely specific to western cultures and lack internal validity, as well as having a potential danger with some individuals using situational variables as a way to excuse their behaviours. 

Comments

No comments have yet been made

Similar Psychology resources:

See all Psychology resources »See all Conformity resources »