Obedience: Situational Variables
A01 - KNOWLEDE
Describe A03 - EVALUTION
and evaluate two situational variables that have been shown by
Proximity
Milgram to affect obedience to authority
- In Milgram's original study, the - In a field experiment in New York
teacher and learner were in City, Bickman had 3 confederates
adjoining rooms, so the teacher dressed in 3 different outfits- jacket
could hear the learner but not see and tie, a milkman's outfit, and a
him. In the proximity variation, they security guard's uniform. The
were in the same room and in this confederates stood in the street and
condition, the obedience rate asked passers-by to perform tasks
dropped from the baseline 65% to such as picking up litter or giving the
40%. In an even more dramatic confederate a coin for the parking
variation, the teacher had to force meter. People were twice as likely
the learner's hand onto an to obey the assistant dressed as a
'electroshock plate' when he security guard than the one dressed
refused to answer a question. In this in jacket and tie. This supports
touch proximity condition, the Milgram's conclusion that a uniform
obedience rate dropped further to conveys the authority of its wearer
30%. In a third proximity variation, and it is a situational factor likely to
the experimenter left the room and produce obedience.
gave instructions to the teacher by - Orne and Holland's criticism of
telephone. In this remote Milgram's original study was that
instruction condition, time many of the Ps worked out that the
proximity was reduced. The procedure was faked. It is even
outcome was a further reduction in more likely that Ps in Milgram's
obedience to 20.5% variations realised this because of
Location the extra manipulation. A good
- In another kind of variation, example is the variation where the
Milgram changed the location of the experimenter is replaced by a
obedience study. He conducted a 'member of the public'. Even
variation of the study in a run-down Milgram recognised that this
building rather than the prestigious situation was so contrived that
university setting where it was some Ps may well have worked out
originally conducted. In such a the truth. This is a limitation of all
situation the experimenter had less Milgram's studies as it is unclear
authority and the obedience level in whether the results are genuinely
the original baseline study was 65%, due to the operation of obedience
however the change in location or because the Ps saw through the
caused the obedience level to deception and acted accordingly.
decrease to 47.5%.
Uniform - The general strength of Milgram's
A01 - KNOWLEDE
Describe A03 - EVALUTION
and evaluate two situational variables that have been shown by
Proximity
Milgram to affect obedience to authority
- In Milgram's original study, the - In a field experiment in New York
teacher and learner were in City, Bickman had 3 confederates
adjoining rooms, so the teacher dressed in 3 different outfits- jacket
could hear the learner but not see and tie, a milkman's outfit, and a
him. In the proximity variation, they security guard's uniform. The
were in the same room and in this confederates stood in the street and
condition, the obedience rate asked passers-by to perform tasks
dropped from the baseline 65% to such as picking up litter or giving the
40%. In an even more dramatic confederate a coin for the parking
variation, the teacher had to force meter. People were twice as likely
the learner's hand onto an to obey the assistant dressed as a
'electroshock plate' when he security guard than the one dressed
refused to answer a question. In this in jacket and tie. This supports
touch proximity condition, the Milgram's conclusion that a uniform
obedience rate dropped further to conveys the authority of its wearer
30%. In a third proximity variation, and it is a situational factor likely to
the experimenter left the room and produce obedience.
gave instructions to the teacher by - Orne and Holland's criticism of
telephone. In this remote Milgram's original study was that
instruction condition, time many of the Ps worked out that the
proximity was reduced. The procedure was faked. It is even
outcome was a further reduction in more likely that Ps in Milgram's
obedience to 20.5% variations realised this because of
Location the extra manipulation. A good
- In another kind of variation, example is the variation where the
Milgram changed the location of the experimenter is replaced by a
obedience study. He conducted a 'member of the public'. Even
variation of the study in a run-down Milgram recognised that this
building rather than the prestigious situation was so contrived that
university setting where it was some Ps may well have worked out
originally conducted. In such a the truth. This is a limitation of all
situation the experimenter had less Milgram's studies as it is unclear
authority and the obedience level in whether the results are genuinely
the original baseline study was 65%, due to the operation of obedience
however the change in location or because the Ps saw through the
caused the obedience level to deception and acted accordingly.
decrease to 47.5%.
Uniform - The general strength of Milgram's
