Milgram (1963)

Frage	Antworten
aims	1. how obedient individuals would be to orders received from a person in authority 2. whether individuals would be obedient even when it would result in physical harm to another person
research method	controlled observation
IV?	authority
DV	level of obedience: maximum voltage given in response to the orders (15v - 450v)
why was Milgram (1963) not an experiment?	no proper IV no control and experimental conditions
sample	1. 40 men 2. aged 20-50 3. resided in the New Haven area 4. diverse professional backgrounds, e.g.: postal clerks, engineers
sampling technique	volunteer sample obtained through a newspaper advertisement participants paid $4.50
the 'experimenter'	'Mr Williams' 1. stern, impassive manner 2. grey technician's coat
the 'learner'/stooge	Mr Wallace 1. middle-aged, likeable 2. worked for Milgram, trained in the procedure
the shock generator	1. 30 switches (15v - 450v) 2. 8 groups of verbal designations: 'moderate shock' 'danger: severe shock' to 'XXX'
what learning task did the stooge participate in?	paired associate learning task
why was the shock generator made to look genuine?	so that participants' natural/genuine reactions can be recorded & observed reduce demand characteristics and maintain deception
procedure: feedback from the 'learner'	1. learner did not protest during punishment until 300v 2. pounds on the wall at 300v 3. stops responding altogether
verbal prods from 'experimenter'	please go on/ please continue/ the experiment requires that you continue/ it is absolutely essential that you continue/ you have no other choice, you must go on
observation	there were 2-3 observers that took turns through a one-way mirror noted physical behaviours and any comments made
when did the procedure conclude?	when the participant refused to proceed or had administered the maximum shock (450v)
debriefing (interview)	each participant was interviewed and the deception was explained to them friendly reconciliation session between participants and the 'learner' to reassure that he was not harmed
mean pain rating of the 450v shock	13.42/14 participants were aware they were causing serious harm
results	the mean shock: 368v all participants gave at least 300v 65% of participants administered the maximum shock
qualitative data collected during procedure	showed progressive signs of nervousness: sweating, shaking, groaning & some displayed nervous laughter/smiling one participant had a violent seizure
procedure: verbal comments made by participants	'I don't think I can go on with this... I don't think this is very humane.' 'I'm gonna chicken out... I can't do that to a man, I'll hurt his heart.'
qualitative data collected after the procedure	showed visible signs of relief: wiped their faces, sighed, shook their heads

Nächster

Beschreibung

Zusammenfassung der Ressource

ähnlicher Inhalt

	Erstellt von Prarthana Nica vor mehr als ein Jahr