GRAVE milgrams experiments

?

Generalisability

  • Sample is not representative of general population, males 20-50 (adrocentric research)
  • Self selecting sample (volunteers) from an advertisement could perhaps be more compliant or more authoritive- "blamed experimenter"
1 of 5

Reliability

  • Highly standardised and controlled. As they briefed, apparatus and prods were the same. Behaviour was monitored, repeatable-scientific
  • Lab research is unrealistic  and not representative of real behaviour
  • Task lacked Mundane Realism as it is not ordinary -unique.
2 of 5

Application

  • Explains attrocities -nazis- We are all capabkle of harming.
  • Could increase obedience in the workplace/schools
  • Artificial, cant apply to real life as lacks mundane realism.
3 of 5

Validity

  • Some beleived that they didnt administer real shocks
  • Lacks ecological validity, not usual everyday activity, didnt seem real.
  • individual differences, some could be more passive and some more resistant
4 of 5

Ethical

  • Dina Baurind 1964 says taht it was deliberate distress, but Milgram never anticipated the distress involved. However, he conducted 18 of these studies on 636 people
  • Decpetion, participants thought they were giving shocks, mr wallice was real and they were in a memory expeiment not obedience experiment, draw was rigged.
  • Caused distress and embarassment but told that it was "normal behaviour"
  • They were allowed the 'right to withdraw'
5 of 5

Comments

No comments have yet been made

Similar Psychology resources:

See all Psychology resources »See all obedience resources »