SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY - OBEDIENCE TO AUTHORITY

OBEDIENCE IN THE FIELD

WHAT WAS THE STUDY DONE BY HOFLING ET AL?

WHAT DID THEY FIND?

THE POWER OF UNIFORM

WHAT WAS THE STUDY DONE BY BICKMAN?

WHAT DID HE FIND?

WHAT DID BUSHMAN FIND?

Nurses were istructed to give a patient 20mg of Astroten by 'Dr Smith' - broke several rules - above maximum dose / no given written authority / nurses didn't know Dr Smith / drug wasn't on the ward list

21/22 nurses obeyed Dr Smith

Explored the role of uniforms - Participants were asked to lend money for a parking meter, pick up a bag, or stand on other side of bus stop

Obedience rates differed with different uniform, partipants more likely to obey when experimenter was dressed as guard rather than street clothes

70% Complied when uniformed / 58% Whn dressed in smart clothing

WHY WAS MILGRAMS STUDY DESIGNED?

WHAT WERE THE PARTICPANTS INSTRUCTED TO DO?

HOW DID THE LEARNER REACT AT 180V, 300V, 315V?

HOW DID THE EXPERMINETER 'PROD' THE TEACHER TO CONTINUE?

WHAT DID MILGRAM FIND?

HOW DID THIS COMPARE TO THE PREDICTION MADE BEFORE THE EXPERIMENT?

See if participants would obey an experimenter when instructed to give a person potentially dangerous electric shocks (ranging from 15-450V)

Give the learner an electric shock everytime he made a mistake - no shocks were actually given, learner was a confederate

180V: complained of weak heart / 300V: banged on wall and demanded to leave 315V: refused to answer became silent

e.g. 'please continue' - 'the experiment requires that you continue' - 'It is absolutly essential that you continue'

All ppts went to 300V - 65% administers max shock

Psychiatrists predicted only 2.6% would continue to adminster a very strong shock up to 240V

WHAT DID MILGRAM FIND WHEN HE INCREASED THE DISTANCE BETWEEN EXPERIMENTER AND PARTICIPANT?

WHAT DID MILGARM FIND WHEN THERE WAS REMOTE FEEDBACK?

WHAT WAS FOUND WHEN LEARNER WAS ONLY 1 METER AWAY FROM PPT?

WHAT WAS FOUND WHEN THERE WAS TOUCH PROXIMITY?

WHAT WAS FOUND WHEN AUTHORITY OF EXPERIMENTER WAS REDUCED?

WHAT WAS THE FINDING WHEN THE LOCATION WAS LESS CREDIBLE?

WHAT HAPPEND WHEN THERE WAS A 2ND CONFERERATE ACTING AS A TEACHER WHO REFUSED TO GIVE SHOCKS?

The orders were given by telephone rather than face to face (450V = 20%)

Where the victim was not seen or heard (66%)

40% when up to 450V

The ppt had to force the learners hand onto shockplate (30%)

Experimenter wasn't a scientist but a member of the public (20%)

Experiment was conducted in a seedy office rather than a prestigious university (48%)

450V = 10%

WHY WAS MILGRAM UNABLE TO GAIN INFOMED CONSENT?

HOW DID MILGRAM RESPOND?

HOW DOES MILGRAMS STUDY LACK INTERNAL VALIDITY?

WHAT IS THE EVIDENCE PROVIDED FOR THIS CLAIM?

HOW IS MILGRAMS STUDY UNETHICAL BY FAILING TO PROTECT PPTS FROM PSYCHOLOGICAL HARM?

WHAT EVIDNECE SUPPORTS THIS CLAIM?

HOW HAS MILGRAN CONTRADICT THIS CLAIM?

Participants not fully informed about nature of study

attempted to gain presumptive consent before the study, by asking psychological communtiy to predict the findings

Ppts may not have been fooled by setup, so didnt think they were harming learner

Orne and Hollad argued only reason ppts appeared distressed was becuse they were strained by playing along with experimental setup

Ppts under emotional strain and distress - believed killed or injured person

Darley suggests experience of administering shocks, may make ppts feel more able and motivated to repeat actions - personalities alter

participants provided with thourgh debreifing, ensured ppts feelings towards their behaviour were minimised - told behaviour was normal

WHAT WAS SHOWN IN THE QUESTIONARE SENT TO PPTS AFTER STUDY?

HOW IS POPULATION VALIDITY LOW IN MILGRAMS STUDY?

WHAT IS THE EVIDENCE FOR THIS POINT?

HOW DOES MILGRAMS STUDY LACK ECOLOGICAL VALIDITY?

WHAT IS THE EVIDENCE FOR THIS CLAIM?

84% were glad to have taken part / 1.3% were sorry to have taken part

Used only male American participants - may not be represetative of other cultures or females

40% of Australian males would administer max shock, only 16% of Australian females did so

Study was lab based - ppts knew taking part in psychological experiment - may not be able to generalise to other natural situations

Rank and Jacobson carried out study in hospital - 89% of nurses refused to take order from unknown docter over the phone

WHAT IS MEANT BY THE OBEDIENCE ALIBI?

SITUATIONAL FACTORS IN OBEDIENCE

HOW DOES LEGITIMATE AUTHORITY AFFECT OBEDIENCE?

GIVE AN EXAMPLE FORM MILGRAMS STUDY OF LEGITIMATE AUTHORITY?

HOW DOES GRADUATED COMMITMENT AFFECT OBEDIENCE?

GIVE AN EXAMPLE IN MILGRAMS STUDY OF GRADUATED COMITTMENT?

HOW DOES THE AGENIC STATE AFFACT OBEDIENCE?

GIVE AN EXAMPLE OF THIS IN MILGRAMS STUDY?

Milgrams research provides alibi for war crime as it implies any ordinary man can commit terrible acts under social pressure

We assume people in authority have knowledge or expertise, we can trust them

Assumption was experimenter knew what he was doing

Known as 'foot-in-the-door' techinique - once we agree to small request we feel obliged to agree to greater requests

Having agreed to give 15V, difficult to refuse to give 45V

People carry out orders but don't feel personally responsible

Participants were told the full responsibility was the experimenters

PERSONALITY FACTORS IN OBEDIENCE

WHAT IS AUTHORITARIAN PERSONALITY?

WHAT KIND OF EXPERIENCES LEAD TO DEVELOPMENT OF AUTHORITARIAN PERSOALITY?

WHAT DID MILGRAM FIND IN REFERENCE TO AUTHORITARIAN PERSONALITY?

.................................................................................................................................

HOW DOES THE IMPORTANCE OF SELF JUSTIFICATION AND BLAMING VICTIM EXPLAIN REAL CASES?

HOW CAN MOTIVATIONAL FACTORS EXPLAIN REAL OBEDIENCE CASES?

Person who has extreme respect for authority - very obedient to those who have power over them - hostile to those of lower rank

Brought up by strict parents who used harsh, physical punishments

Those fully odedient who went to 450V scored higher on authoritarian test

Individual blames victim, they deserved whats happened - allows people to continue to view themselves as decent

e.g. personal gain - those who wroked in gas chambers used to plunder corpses