Describe and Evaluate Milgram’s research into obedience.
Milgram (1963) investigated the effects into conformity with presence of an authority figure. This
was advocated with his original study of obedience. Milgram wanted to find the answer to
obedience and why individuals would conform to evil acts. The procedure obligated 40 male
participants that used volunteer sampling with a newspaper advert. It endured the sense of shocks.
There were two confederates. One was the learner whilst the other was the researcher. The
participant would play as the teacher. Every time the learner got a question wrong, they were
shocked and this was prohibited by the 4 prods. The findings represented the percentage amount of
shocks. 100% shopped at 300 volts and 65% stopped at 450 volts. Milgram had questioned university
students who study psychology and this only totalled 3%. This had shown that authority effects
conformity levels which leads to behavioural changes and obedience.
One limitation of the research is that is contained low internal validity. Participants believed that the
shocks weren’t real as led to a lack of validity. Orne and Holland in 1968 had collected research from
this, agreeing that it didn’t “feel real” Another critic by Gina Perry backs this point. She has listened
to the tapes and finalised the resist that participants admitted to had doubts about the shock. This
was an essential problem for Milgram as there was a lack of realness and support from his
participants that were to help with the validity of his research, so the result cannot be generalised as
it may be inaccurate to a participant’s opinion. However, there are supports for the experimental
study that back the point of it being valid. The experiment was replicated into pupped by King in the
1970’s. 100% of females delivered fatal shock. However, the experiment cannot be replicated
towards a puppy compared to a human as they don’t believe that its real.
However, the research DID hold good external validity instead of internal. This was evidenced with
Hoffling et al who had studied an experiment in a hospital ward. This was focused on the
relationship between an authority figure and a participant. A confederate was disguised as a doctor
in a hospital ward and was giving unjustified demands to nurses. As he was a “doctor” the nurses
obliged to it leading to the support of external validity. This is a strength as the results have shown
that 21/22 (95%) of the nurses obliged to unjust demands and controlled the level of obedience,
which in turn supports Milgram’s research as the experiment can be generalised in outside setting as
well as internal settings such as a lab. This helps to operate findings in real life settings.
Another strength of the research is that it is replicated into modern time studies too. This is
supported by TV shows. For example, A French show called the game of death had replicated this
study into their contestants to give fake shocks to the presenter. Like Milgram, intron 80% gave
shocks to participants who was apparently an “unconscious man” this is a strength as it replicates
Milgram’s findings of obedience with author figure to modern day settings and is replicated too.
One limitation of the experiment is that it holds Ethical issues with the participants that perpetuates
psychological harm. Diana in 1964 was critical in the ways that Milgram has deceived his
participants. He first has advertised the experiment as a “memory” test advocating deceitful
behaviour and then in turn, the experiment clearly had caused psychological harm during the
debriefing. 84£ of the participants were glad to participate whereas 16% wished they didn’t. This
meant that those who were debriefed may have faced psychological harm such as PTSD from the
experiment. This is a limitation as it’s a grand ethical issue since participants were harmed.
Milgram (1963) investigated the effects into conformity with presence of an authority figure. This
was advocated with his original study of obedience. Milgram wanted to find the answer to
obedience and why individuals would conform to evil acts. The procedure obligated 40 male
participants that used volunteer sampling with a newspaper advert. It endured the sense of shocks.
There were two confederates. One was the learner whilst the other was the researcher. The
participant would play as the teacher. Every time the learner got a question wrong, they were
shocked and this was prohibited by the 4 prods. The findings represented the percentage amount of
shocks. 100% shopped at 300 volts and 65% stopped at 450 volts. Milgram had questioned university
students who study psychology and this only totalled 3%. This had shown that authority effects
conformity levels which leads to behavioural changes and obedience.
One limitation of the research is that is contained low internal validity. Participants believed that the
shocks weren’t real as led to a lack of validity. Orne and Holland in 1968 had collected research from
this, agreeing that it didn’t “feel real” Another critic by Gina Perry backs this point. She has listened
to the tapes and finalised the resist that participants admitted to had doubts about the shock. This
was an essential problem for Milgram as there was a lack of realness and support from his
participants that were to help with the validity of his research, so the result cannot be generalised as
it may be inaccurate to a participant’s opinion. However, there are supports for the experimental
study that back the point of it being valid. The experiment was replicated into pupped by King in the
1970’s. 100% of females delivered fatal shock. However, the experiment cannot be replicated
towards a puppy compared to a human as they don’t believe that its real.
However, the research DID hold good external validity instead of internal. This was evidenced with
Hoffling et al who had studied an experiment in a hospital ward. This was focused on the
relationship between an authority figure and a participant. A confederate was disguised as a doctor
in a hospital ward and was giving unjustified demands to nurses. As he was a “doctor” the nurses
obliged to it leading to the support of external validity. This is a strength as the results have shown
that 21/22 (95%) of the nurses obliged to unjust demands and controlled the level of obedience,
which in turn supports Milgram’s research as the experiment can be generalised in outside setting as
well as internal settings such as a lab. This helps to operate findings in real life settings.
Another strength of the research is that it is replicated into modern time studies too. This is
supported by TV shows. For example, A French show called the game of death had replicated this
study into their contestants to give fake shocks to the presenter. Like Milgram, intron 80% gave
shocks to participants who was apparently an “unconscious man” this is a strength as it replicates
Milgram’s findings of obedience with author figure to modern day settings and is replicated too.
One limitation of the experiment is that it holds Ethical issues with the participants that perpetuates
psychological harm. Diana in 1964 was critical in the ways that Milgram has deceived his
participants. He first has advertised the experiment as a “memory” test advocating deceitful
behaviour and then in turn, the experiment clearly had caused psychological harm during the
debriefing. 84£ of the participants were glad to participate whereas 16% wished they didn’t. This
meant that those who were debriefed may have faced psychological harm such as PTSD from the
experiment. This is a limitation as it’s a grand ethical issue since participants were harmed.
