Situational Variables Affecting Obedience

Proximity between teacher + learner found to affect obedience as well as proximity between authority figure + teacher.

Milgram found when experimetner left the room + gave orders over phone, more people able to resist w/ only 20% participants going all the way to 450v.

When teacher + learner in same room + teacher could see the distress the learner was going through due to the consequences of their actions, obedience rates declined to 40%. When teacher was tasked w/ forcing learners hand on to shcok plate obedience declined to 30%.

The closer peopel were to observing the consequences of their actions, the lower the obedeince rates as more people resisted. When people able to feel detached from consequences of thier actions eg not being able to see them first hand, the higher obedience is.

Location + environment found to affect the amount of perceived legitimate authority the person giving orders has. 

In Milgram's original study, conducted at  Yale, which added to perceived legitimacy of authority figure giving orders. M recreated obedience study in a run down town office block in Connecticut + obedience rates fell to 47.5%. Suggests that the perceived legitimacy of the authority figure was lowered due to location + its context - run down office block suggests experimenter giving orders had less perceived authority than a researcher ar a well respected univeristy

Uniforms can impact obedience rates w/ those wearing them being perceived as having legitimate authority + people more likely to obey their orders.

In Milgram's study, the researcher wore a white lab coat, which is believed to have added to his perceived authority.

Research support - Bickman (1974) found when a research assistant dressed in mormal civilian clothing ordered people to pick up rubbish, loan money to a complete stranger or move away from a bus stop, up to 19% people obeyed. Decreased to 14% when uniform milkmans uniform, increased to 38% when assistant dressed as security guard.

Bushman (1988) found supporting evidence - female assistant dressed in a police-styled unform asked people passing to loan money to stranger for parking meder, obedience as high as 72%. 48% when dressed as business women, 52% when dressed as a beggar.

Historical validity - Burger (2009) found levels of obedience almost identical to those found by Milgram 46 years earlier. M's findings still appear to apply as much today as they did in the early 1960s.

Internal validity: lack of realism. Perry (2012) discovered many of M's participants sceptical at time about whether shocks were real. One of research participants, Murata, divided assistants into 'doubters' + 'believers'. Found latter group more likley to disobey experimenter + give only low intensity shocks.

Individual diffs: influence of gender - M underestimated importance of individual diffs in obedience. M had one condition where participants female. Although found self-reported tension in females who went to max shock level significantly higher than males, rate for obedience exactly the same as males in comparable condition. Blass (1999) studied 9 other replications of study, also had M + F participants - consisten w/ M's findings, 8/9 no evidence of gender diffs in obedience.