Null Hypothesis:
There will be no difference in obedience between the signs written by the authority figure and school pupil
Variables:
The independent variable was whom the signs were written by. The dependent variable was whether the pupil obeyed the signs or not.
Population:
Sixth Form pupils (16 and over), in UK.
Sample:
An opportunity sample of 40 Sixth Form pupils from a secondary school in Letchworth per lunch hour. They included male and female subjects, ranging from 16 to 18 years old.
Method:
Over the period of one lunch hour, it was observed how many Sixth Form pupils purchased drinks from the one drink vending machine in the Sixth Form common room. This was used as the control condition to make me aware of the number of people who would have to obey the sign. Permission was gained from the Head of Sixth Form to place a sign stating “Not to be used by Sixth Form during this lunch period” on the vending machine. For the first condition, this sign was signed by a member of the Sixth Form. Over the lunch period, the first 40 pupils to use the drink vending machine were observed to see how many obeyed the sign. The following lunch period, the sign was replaced with one that was signed by the Head of Sixth Form, and again the first 40 pupils were observed to see how many obeyed this sign. The results were recorded following each lunch period.
Data:
Table 1.1
Table 1.1 shows that over one lunch hour when there was no sign, 56 people used the drink vending machine. When there was a sign which was signed by a Sixth Form pupil, only 12 out of the first 40 pupils observed obeyed it. However, when there was a sign which was signed by the Head of Sixth Form, 33 out of the first 40 pupils observed obeyed it.
Figure 1.1: Graph to show the number of pupils who obeyed the sign in each condition.
Figure 1.1 is a representation of the data in Table 1.1.
Conclusion:
From my data, I can conclude that pupils obeyed the Head of Sixth Form more. This is because the Head of Sixth form is viewed as an authority figure, and is therefore more likely to be obeyed. This agrees with Milgram’s study, as authority figures are more likely to be obeyed than people of equal status. I would therefore accept my original hypothesis and reject my null hypothesis.
Discussion:
The observation was a success, as I gained the results I expected. However, I did not observe the ethical guidelines, as the people being observed did not give their consent. However it must be recognised that if they had been informed beforehand of the observation taking place, their actions would have been different and the results would not have been relevant.
