Milgram's Variation (1965) Evaluation

Description

AS Level Social Approach (Milgram's variation study of obedience) Mind Map on Milgram's Variation (1965) Evaluation, created by ayahm196 on 26/04/2014.
ayahm196
Mind Map by ayahm196, updated more than 1 year ago
ayahm196
Created by ayahm196 over 10 years ago
262
0

Resource summary

Milgram's Variation (1965) Evaluation
  1. GENERALISABILITY
    1. Milgram's study sampled 80 white American aged 20-50, so the study is only generalisable to a very select target population, but not to the whole population.
    2. RELIABILITY
      1. All variables were highly controlled, therefore it is reliable. However, it was a lab experiment, meaning that the participants may not have been showing ecologically valid behaviour, especially because they were being asked to do an unusual task.
      2. VALIDITY
        1. The study had a lab method. Giving shocks to other people is not something that people encounter every day, therefore there would be a very low ecological validity.
        2. APPLICATION
          1. The variation study can be applied to real life as it proves that acts of rebellion or obedience can have a large impact on someone's behaviour.
          2. ETHICS
            1. Protection of participants - Milgram did not protect his participants as he put them in a position of stress.
              1. Right to withdraw - Milgram made the p's feel like they could not leave the experiment by giving them verbal prods.
                1. Deception - Milgram made the p's think they were actually electrocuting someone and some of the participants even thought he was dead.
                Show full summary Hide full summary

                Similar

                Strengths and Weaknesses of Psychological Approaches
                Robyn Chamberlain
                Milgram (1963)
                Shadow64
                Social Approach Revision
                Jess Marsh
                Approaches to learning
                K Dee
                Milgram (1963)
                Prarthana Nica
                Piliavin et al. (1969)
                Prarthana Nica
                Strengths and Weaknesses of Psychological Approaches
                Meena KA
                Strengths and Weaknesses of Psychological Approaches
                Gaia Lambert
                Strengths and Weaknesses of Psychological Approaches
                simone14
                Strengths and Weaknesses of Psychological Approaches
                Jake Norman
                Strengths and Weaknesses of Psychological Approaches
                suman tanveer