Psychology overview (detailed):
Table of Contents
Social approach:.......................................................................................1
Research methods:..................................................................................8
Biological approach:...............................................................................11
Cognitive approach:...............................................................................14
Learning approach:.................................................................................16
Social approach:
Milgram:
1963:
Aim: Milgram set out to find if people would follow orders from an
authority figure and undergo agentic shift. He was particularly interested
in proving if Nazis were or were not responsible for their actions.
Procedure:
There were 40 male participants aged between 20 and 50.
The participant were “teachers” and would read word lists to the
“learner” who was a confederate in the study.
The participant had to administer an electric shock to the learner of
they got the word wrong.
Participants could go to a maximum of 450V.
The participants were also given 4 verbal prods from the
experimenter when they decided they wanted to stop.
It was conducted in Yale university.
The prods given from the experimenter were; please continue, the
experiment requires you to continue, it is absolutely essential that
you continue, you have no other choice but to continue.
There were protests from the confederate with claims of a heart
problem and then fell silent close to the end.
Findings:
100% of people went to 300V.
65% of people went to 450V.
1
,Evaluation:
Strengths Weaknesses
- Internal validity: there were - Ethics: right to withdraw was
high levels of control in place. undermined due to the verbal
- Validity: the high controls have prods given by the
meant there have been experimenter.
multiple variations of the study - Ethics: the participants
completed by both Milgram experienced moral strain which
and others showing was distressing and they also
consistency of findings. thought they had killed/
harmed a person.
- Ecological validity: the study
was done in a lab and wasn’t a
natural task.
Telephonic instructions:
Aim: to see if levels of obedience differ if the experimenter/ authority
figure is giving instructions remotely.
Procedure: The initial instructions were given by the experimenter face to
face then the experimenter left and gave following instructions over the
phone.
Results: the percentage of people that went to 450V in this variation fell
from 65% to 22.5%. It was also observed that participants would lie to the
experimenter about what level of shock they were giving to the learner.
Rundown office block:
Aim: to investigate whether obedience levels change if the environment
isn’t as professional.
Procedure: The procedure was the same as that of the original study
except the office block was sparsely furnished and was run down giving
off a less prestigious atmosphere to the participants involved.
Results: the percentage of people that went to 450V fell from 65% to 48%.
Ordinary man:
Aim: to investigate if the legitimacy of the authority figure has an impact
on the obedience of participants.
2
, Procedure: the same procedure as that of the original study however the
experimenter was wearing ordinary clothes a rather than a lab coat.
Results: 80% of the participants didn’t go to 450V the obedience level
was 20%.
Burger:
Aim: Burger wanted to find if the results of Milgram’s experiment would
occur the same if the study was conducted ethically.
Procedure: 70 participants aged between 20-81. The procedure is the
exact same as Milgram’s original study except Burger includes a screening
process before the experiment ensuring that any people that would not be
suitable for the study wouldn’t be involved also he ensures that the
participants have the right to withdraw. The experiment is also stopped at
150V if the participant hadn’t withdrawn already as Milgram had identified
this as the point of no return.
Results: 70% were prepared to go past 150V so obedience is higher than it
was in Milgram’s original experiment.
Evaluation:
Strengths Weaknesses
- His sample used a sample of - The study is not valid
70 people making his study because the task given to
more generalisable than the participants was artificial
Milgram. and therefore didn’t
- It can be seen to have represent real life
application as the study obedience.
shows how authority works - The study also is invalid as
to increase obedience. the assumption that
- Much better ethically than participants would not
Milgram. dropout before 450V if they
reached 150V may have
been invalid.
- The ethical concerns around
the study include:
deception, no informed
consent, protection of
participants (distress).
3
Table of Contents
Social approach:.......................................................................................1
Research methods:..................................................................................8
Biological approach:...............................................................................11
Cognitive approach:...............................................................................14
Learning approach:.................................................................................16
Social approach:
Milgram:
1963:
Aim: Milgram set out to find if people would follow orders from an
authority figure and undergo agentic shift. He was particularly interested
in proving if Nazis were or were not responsible for their actions.
Procedure:
There were 40 male participants aged between 20 and 50.
The participant were “teachers” and would read word lists to the
“learner” who was a confederate in the study.
The participant had to administer an electric shock to the learner of
they got the word wrong.
Participants could go to a maximum of 450V.
The participants were also given 4 verbal prods from the
experimenter when they decided they wanted to stop.
It was conducted in Yale university.
The prods given from the experimenter were; please continue, the
experiment requires you to continue, it is absolutely essential that
you continue, you have no other choice but to continue.
There were protests from the confederate with claims of a heart
problem and then fell silent close to the end.
Findings:
100% of people went to 300V.
65% of people went to 450V.
1
,Evaluation:
Strengths Weaknesses
- Internal validity: there were - Ethics: right to withdraw was
high levels of control in place. undermined due to the verbal
- Validity: the high controls have prods given by the
meant there have been experimenter.
multiple variations of the study - Ethics: the participants
completed by both Milgram experienced moral strain which
and others showing was distressing and they also
consistency of findings. thought they had killed/
harmed a person.
- Ecological validity: the study
was done in a lab and wasn’t a
natural task.
Telephonic instructions:
Aim: to see if levels of obedience differ if the experimenter/ authority
figure is giving instructions remotely.
Procedure: The initial instructions were given by the experimenter face to
face then the experimenter left and gave following instructions over the
phone.
Results: the percentage of people that went to 450V in this variation fell
from 65% to 22.5%. It was also observed that participants would lie to the
experimenter about what level of shock they were giving to the learner.
Rundown office block:
Aim: to investigate whether obedience levels change if the environment
isn’t as professional.
Procedure: The procedure was the same as that of the original study
except the office block was sparsely furnished and was run down giving
off a less prestigious atmosphere to the participants involved.
Results: the percentage of people that went to 450V fell from 65% to 48%.
Ordinary man:
Aim: to investigate if the legitimacy of the authority figure has an impact
on the obedience of participants.
2
, Procedure: the same procedure as that of the original study however the
experimenter was wearing ordinary clothes a rather than a lab coat.
Results: 80% of the participants didn’t go to 450V the obedience level
was 20%.
Burger:
Aim: Burger wanted to find if the results of Milgram’s experiment would
occur the same if the study was conducted ethically.
Procedure: 70 participants aged between 20-81. The procedure is the
exact same as Milgram’s original study except Burger includes a screening
process before the experiment ensuring that any people that would not be
suitable for the study wouldn’t be involved also he ensures that the
participants have the right to withdraw. The experiment is also stopped at
150V if the participant hadn’t withdrawn already as Milgram had identified
this as the point of no return.
Results: 70% were prepared to go past 150V so obedience is higher than it
was in Milgram’s original experiment.
Evaluation:
Strengths Weaknesses
- His sample used a sample of - The study is not valid
70 people making his study because the task given to
more generalisable than the participants was artificial
Milgram. and therefore didn’t
- It can be seen to have represent real life
application as the study obedience.
shows how authority works - The study also is invalid as
to increase obedience. the assumption that
- Much better ethically than participants would not
Milgram. dropout before 450V if they
reached 150V may have
been invalid.
- The ethical concerns around
the study include:
deception, no informed
consent, protection of
participants (distress).
3
