SECTION: Obedience to authority
TOPIC: Social Influence
SUMMARY OF KEY IDEAS (K/U)
1. Obedience is a type of social influence where an individual follow direct orders from an authority figure usually in fear
of punishment (to avoid consequence.)
2. Milgram - Baseline procedure
40 American males (volunteer) were paired with a confederate and chosen to be the teacher in a fixed draw.
(Confederate was the learner.)
In one room the learner was strapped to a shock machine (fake) and in another the experiment and teacher. The
teacher was ordered to give a shock to the learner every time they failed a memory test. (They could hear reactions but
not see them.) With each shock it increased 15 volts up to 450.
When teachers showed hesitation or ask questions prods were given to continue. ‘Please continue,’ ‘experiment
requires you to continue,’ ‘you have no choice but to continue.’
3. Findings – Everyone continued up to 300 volts (up till they fell silent) then 65% went until 450 volts. Many showed
anxiety and stress. Milgram concluded people are willing to obey even with harmful consequences to others.
PEEL STRENGTH PEEL WEAKNESS
Research support – the study was replicated but, in a Low internal validity – after the debrief 75% participants said
documentary, participants were in a ‘game’ but electric they thought it was real. Another psychologist argued
shocks were perceived to be real. Even in front of an participants were just ‘play acting.’ Participants were
audience behaviour was almost identical, also showing responding to demand characteristics.
distress throughout.
Supports original findings, more generalised. But another study involving a puppy and real shocks, showed
50% males gave the shocks and 100% females gave the
shocks, showing in a real shock situation people still obeyed.
PEEL WEAKNESS
Alternative interpretation – the prod given ‘the
experiment requires you to continue,’ influences the Milgram’s Variations – Situational Variables
participant to following scientific aims (everyone He studied how the situation/environment may influence
continued.) But when ordered by the authority alone levels of obedience.
they refused, suggesting the science was the real reason
Proximity – Teacher and learner in the same room obedience
for obedience.
dropped – 65% to 40%
Ethical issues – deceived but debriefed. Teacher forces learners’ hand down to shock them – down to
30%
PEEL STRENGTH Experimenter gave orders over the phone obedience down to
A field experiment in New York, had people dress in 20% - some pretended to give shocks.
uniforms and some in no uniforms give orders to the
public (pick up litter etc.) Public were twice as likely to With decreased proximity people psychologically distance
obey to obey confederate in uniform supporting the themselves from potential consequences.
situational variables powerful effect.
Location – In another variation, the same study was in a run-
down building instead of the lab in the university. Obedience
PEEL WEAKNESS dropped to 47%
Throughout all studies, American males were used A prestigious environment supports authority, the figure is
creating low ability to generalise. seen to share legitimacy with the location, but % was still
But studies have been replicated in other culture. Dutch high.
participants were used, 90% obeyed. Suggesting
Uniform – When the experimenter was replaced but a
research is not limited to Americans, but Dutch are still
member of general public (casual clothes) obedience dropped
western (not that culturally different.)
to 20%
Findings have been criticised to offer an excuse for Uniforms are widely recognised to symbol authority, increased
immoral behaviour. It is offensive for holocaust survivors – legitimacy and general public has less ‘right’ to obey to.
suggesting Nazi’s were just following orders.
TOPIC: Social Influence
SUMMARY OF KEY IDEAS (K/U)
1. Obedience is a type of social influence where an individual follow direct orders from an authority figure usually in fear
of punishment (to avoid consequence.)
2. Milgram - Baseline procedure
40 American males (volunteer) were paired with a confederate and chosen to be the teacher in a fixed draw.
(Confederate was the learner.)
In one room the learner was strapped to a shock machine (fake) and in another the experiment and teacher. The
teacher was ordered to give a shock to the learner every time they failed a memory test. (They could hear reactions but
not see them.) With each shock it increased 15 volts up to 450.
When teachers showed hesitation or ask questions prods were given to continue. ‘Please continue,’ ‘experiment
requires you to continue,’ ‘you have no choice but to continue.’
3. Findings – Everyone continued up to 300 volts (up till they fell silent) then 65% went until 450 volts. Many showed
anxiety and stress. Milgram concluded people are willing to obey even with harmful consequences to others.
PEEL STRENGTH PEEL WEAKNESS
Research support – the study was replicated but, in a Low internal validity – after the debrief 75% participants said
documentary, participants were in a ‘game’ but electric they thought it was real. Another psychologist argued
shocks were perceived to be real. Even in front of an participants were just ‘play acting.’ Participants were
audience behaviour was almost identical, also showing responding to demand characteristics.
distress throughout.
Supports original findings, more generalised. But another study involving a puppy and real shocks, showed
50% males gave the shocks and 100% females gave the
shocks, showing in a real shock situation people still obeyed.
PEEL WEAKNESS
Alternative interpretation – the prod given ‘the
experiment requires you to continue,’ influences the Milgram’s Variations – Situational Variables
participant to following scientific aims (everyone He studied how the situation/environment may influence
continued.) But when ordered by the authority alone levels of obedience.
they refused, suggesting the science was the real reason
Proximity – Teacher and learner in the same room obedience
for obedience.
dropped – 65% to 40%
Ethical issues – deceived but debriefed. Teacher forces learners’ hand down to shock them – down to
30%
PEEL STRENGTH Experimenter gave orders over the phone obedience down to
A field experiment in New York, had people dress in 20% - some pretended to give shocks.
uniforms and some in no uniforms give orders to the
public (pick up litter etc.) Public were twice as likely to With decreased proximity people psychologically distance
obey to obey confederate in uniform supporting the themselves from potential consequences.
situational variables powerful effect.
Location – In another variation, the same study was in a run-
down building instead of the lab in the university. Obedience
PEEL WEAKNESS dropped to 47%
Throughout all studies, American males were used A prestigious environment supports authority, the figure is
creating low ability to generalise. seen to share legitimacy with the location, but % was still
But studies have been replicated in other culture. Dutch high.
participants were used, 90% obeyed. Suggesting
Uniform – When the experimenter was replaced but a
research is not limited to Americans, but Dutch are still
member of general public (casual clothes) obedience dropped
western (not that culturally different.)
to 20%
Findings have been criticised to offer an excuse for Uniforms are widely recognised to symbol authority, increased
immoral behaviour. It is offensive for holocaust survivors – legitimacy and general public has less ‘right’ to obey to.
suggesting Nazi’s were just following orders.
