Help
Options
Didn't know it?
click below
click below
Knew it?
click below
click below
Don't Know
Remaining cards (0)
Know
retry
shuffle
restart
0:00
Embed Code - If you would like this activity on your web page, copy the script below and paste it into your web page.
Normal Size Small Size show me how
Normal Size Small Size show me how
milgrams study
| Question | Answer |
|---|---|
| Context | Milgram wanted to know why germans were willing to kill jews during the holocaust - germans are diff hypothesis He thought may have been germans are just evil. He though americans were different and wouldnt follow such orders. |
| Aim | Milgram wanted to see whether people would obey a legitimate authority figure when given instructions to harm another human being |
| Procedure | teacher (true participant) or learner (confederate) seperate room. teeacher asked by lab coat to giv shocks when incorrect 15-450 |
| results | the results were that all participants went to 300 volts and 65% were willing to go all the way to 450. Milgram did more than one experiment -18 variations |
| ~18 varriattion | All he did was alter the situation (IV) to see how thiis affected obedience (DV). When the experimenter instructed and prompted the teache by telephone from another room, obedience fell to 20.5% |
| criticisms/limitations eco valid | Lacks ecological validity as it was carried out in a lab under artificial conditions. it might not be possible to generalize the findings to a real life setting as people do not usually receive orders to hurt another person in real life |
| limitatiosn sample | Sample was biased. Milgram only used males in his study and this means we can’t generalise the results to females |
| strength value | Highlight the values that milgram's work has provided to social psychology. explain nazi's killing jews when ordered. Also highlights how we can all be blind to obediience often doing things without questions |
| strength standardised | A strength is that is used standardised procedure because it was a lab experiment. This is good because it improves the reliability of the study and also helps establish a casual relationship. Same equipment, setup, shock generator - reliable |
| Ethical consideration | Deception - the participants actually believed they were shocking a real person and were unaware the learner was a confederate Protection of participants - were exposed to extremely stressful situations Many of the participants were visibly distressed 3 |
| ethical consideration effect | Milgram also interviewd participants to find out the effect the deception. Apparently 83.7% said that they were ‘glad to be in the experiemn; and 1.3% siad that they wished they hadnt been involved stressful sittuattion potential for pshych harm - sweat+ |
| iin defence | milgram argued that these effects were only shortt term. Once the participants were debriefed their stress levels decreased. Miilgram also interviewed the participants one year after the evenn and concluded that most were happy that they had taken parrt |
| defence explained | milgram did debrief the participants fully after the experiment and also followed up after a period of time to ensure that they came to no harm. |
| Mr Williams (experimenter) | wore a grey lab coat and his role was to give a series of orders/prods when the participant refused to administer a shock. There were 4 order and if one was not obeyed then the experimenter read out the next order and so on |
Created by:
procrast
Popular Psychology sets