Situational variables affecting obedience

?
how many PPs did Milgram use?
40
1 of 37
what were the PPs tol the study was about?
how punishmet effected elarning
2 of 37
how old wass the confederate that was introduced to the PPs as the learner?
47
3 of 37
how were the lots drawn by the PPs and the Confederate rigged?
The PPs would always be assigned the teacher and the confederate the learner
4 of 37
whgat was the confederate being tested on?
word pairs
5 of 37
what happened when the learner got the question wrong?
they were given an electric shock?
6 of 37
by what incriment did the severity of the electric shocks increseby every time the learner answered wrong?
15v
7 of 37
what happened in the voice feed back study?
When 300v was reached the confederate pounded the wall and refused to andswer the question
8 of 37
How did the confederates attitude change after 315v?
they ddint andswer any of the questions
9 of 37
How would the experimenter react if the PPs stopped ad,mistering the shocks?
He would give a verbal prod to the PPs: "the experiment rewuires yout to continue, you have no kchoice, you must go on"
10 of 37
Prior to the experiment, Milgram asked Psychatrists, coleges and students to predict the findings of hsi study, what did they say?'
Most though that majority of PPs would go beyond 150v and that only 0.1% would go to 450v
11 of 37
what were milgram's findings from the voice feedback study?
26/40 (65%) of the PPS went all the way to 450v
12 of 37
How many PPs stopped at 300v?
5 (12.5%)
13 of 37
What three varibles did Milgram identify as situational factors that wouldaffect obedience?
Proximity, location and uniform
14 of 37
Proximity: what was the obedience rate when the experiment was conducted with the PPs and the Learner in the same room?
obedience dropped to 40% when the PPs expernced the learners anquish and distress more vivedely
15 of 37
Touch proximity: what was the obedience rate when the experiment required thePPs to force the hand of the learner onto a metal plate to recive the electric shock?
30%
16 of 37
expermineter absent: what were the obidence levels when the experimenter left the room after the initial breigfing and goave subsiunet instructions over the telephone?
21% (some PPs repeatedly gave the lowest shock)
17 of 37
Where was the orignial experiment conducted?
Yale University
18 of 37
what was the significance of moving the experiment to a rundown office in bridgeport conneticut?
it was a less prestigous location
19 of 37
what was the obedience rate like when the experiment was conduccted in a rundown office in bridgeport conneticut?
48%
20 of 37
Bushman desinged an experiment in which a female reasercher dressed in 3 different types of unifrom and asked people to give change to a male experimetner for the meter. What were the three different typeds of uniform?
A police style uniform, a buisness suit and a begger outfit
21 of 37
What did Nushman (1988) find?
Police: 72% executive: 48% Begger: 52%
22 of 37
What did Bushman discover from post post experiment interviews?
That people obeyed the policewoman because she was an authoity figure
23 of 37
E1: Why did Baumrind (1964) accuse milgram of violating ethical considerations in the experiment?
Because he decived them and did not give them the right to withdraw
24 of 37
E1: How did milgram decieve his PPs?
By telling them that the experiment was about how punishment effected learning he violated his PPs right to informed consent
25 of 37
E2: How did Milgram violate his PPs' right to withdraw?
As one of the experiment conditions was that the experimenter challenged PPs who wanted to stop and made it more difficult to do so
26 of 37
E2: What critisism about internal validity did Orne and Holland (1968) raise?
The coolenss of the experimenter compared to the violent, pauinful reaction of the learner may have made some PPs sceptical about the reality
27 of 37
E2: how does Perry (2012) support Orne and Holland's critisism?
he showed that Milgram's original PPs were sceptical about the realism of the shocks. Milgram's staff divided them into belivers and doubters and found the former more likly to disobey
28 of 37
E3: How can Milgram be critisised for his reaserch into individual differences?
He assumed the Eagly (1978) was right in that women would be more suseptable to obedience
29 of 37
E3: In milgrams only female condition what did he find?
Appart from a self report that they experenaced more tension in the process, Milgram's female condition was much the same as it was for men
30 of 37
E3: how did Blass (1999) back up Milgram's findings?
By reviewing 9 studies of Milgram's experiment with women Blass (1999) concluded that there was little differnce between the genders in terms of obedience
31 of 37
E4: What was Mandel's (1998) cheif critisism of Milgram's reaserch?
Milgram's findings were not borne out in real life atrocities
32 of 37
E4: Which historical event backs up Mandel's critisism?
on the 13th July 1942 the 101st Battalion of the the polish town of Jozefow was ordered to execute their Jewish population on mass
33 of 37
E4: How did the Jozefow massacre bolster Mandel's point?
Major Wilhelm Trapp offered the men other duties if they did not want to take part. Very few men disobeyed dispite the presence of situational factors that encouraged disobedience
34 of 37
E4 Which situational factors in the Jozefow massacre encourged disobedience?
Close proximity of the victim, the presense of dispbedient peers and no prods from authority
35 of 37
E5: What did Blass (1999) reviel about the historical validity of Milgram's study?
By conducting a meta analysis of the data collected from these experiments between 1961 and 1985 Balss (1999) found no changing trend in the results
36 of 37
E5: which resent studies have shown results to be almost idnetical to the ones ccollected in the original study?
Burger (2009) and Brown (2006)
37 of 37

Other cards in this set

Card 2

Front

what were the PPs tol the study was about?

Back

how punishmet effected elarning

Card 3

Front

how old wass the confederate that was introduced to the PPs as the learner?

Back

Preview of the front of card 3

Card 4

Front

how were the lots drawn by the PPs and the Confederate rigged?

Back

Preview of the front of card 4

Card 5

Front

whgat was the confederate being tested on?

Back

Preview of the front of card 5
View more cards

Comments

No comments have yet been made

Similar Psychology resources:

See all Psychology resources »See all Conformity resources »