Milgram Evaluation

Replicable?

Standard instructions and procedure

Data interpretation;

Quantitative data doesn't need interpreting 

Qualitiative data interpretation can be checked by video evidence

Controls;

Same learner and experimenter each time (Stooges)

Same prods e.g. the experiment requires you to continue

Learner responses/screams were pre-recorded and used each time

Population;

Representative of the target population

Not representative of the wider population e.g. sexist, ethnocentric, other ages

Ecological;

It has mundane realism

Can’t generalise outside lab conditions as real life has consequences

Temporal;

Obedience levels/authority figures change over time

Face;

Measuring obedience levels to authority figure when asked to do an unethical task. 

Strengths:

Represented the target population

Weaknesses:

No women

Ethnocentric

Only working class

Quantitative

Strengths:

Easy to interpret

Weaknesses:

No explanation as to why they did that behaviour

Qualitative

Strengths:

Explains it wasn’t easy for them to carry on to the voltage they did e.g. getting stressed, asking to stop

Weaknesses:

Subjective

Needs interpreting – Milgram said they were conflicted but they may not have been 

Informed consent – They weren’t fully informed about everything they’d have to do

Deception – They were told it was about teaching and learning not obedience

Confidentiality – No names were released

Debrief – They were told the full aims afterwards and given support

Protection – Not protected mentally e.g. stress

Observation – Allowed to observe in lab conditions

Withdrawal – Confusion about the ability to withdraw due to prods given by the experimenter