• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

Evaluation of Milgram's Obedience Study

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

Evaluation of Milgram's Obedience Study Stanley Milgram was from a Jewish background and conducted the experiment to see how people can obey to an apparent authority figure e.g. Germans in World War II. He advertised for participants in a newspaper offering payment of $4.50. Volunteers were told that the experiment was looking at the effects of punishment on learning. The participant played the role of the 'teacher' and the 'learner' was a stooge, Mr Wallace. The teacher would ask the learner questions, when answered incorrectly they administered electric shocks of increasing voltage up to 450V. When the teacher began to worry the experimenter would use several prompts to encourage their continuation. 65% of the participants continued up to 450V, no one stopped before 300V. The results were much higher than anyone had expected. However Milgram's work has been highly criticised on ethical and methodological grounds and is highly controversial due to the stress caused to the participants. Milgram's main critic on Ethical grounds is Diane Baumrind. She criticised Milgram on 5 ethical issues; informed consent, deception, the right to withdraw, protection of the participant and debriefing. The British Psychological Society (BPS) guidelines state that participants should be given all the information they need to make an informed decision on whether or not to take part in the experiment. ...read more.

Middle

Milgram also says that the majority of people were happy to have taken part in the experiment, only 1.3% said they were sorry to have taken part. Milgram also had psychiatrists talk to the participants after the experiment, and up to a year later to make sure there was no long term psychological damage. Aronson believes that Milgram was so heavily criticised partly due to the fact that people were shocked by the results not what happened in the experiment. People did not expect to find such high obedience rates. However the experiment is still considered controversial. The way in which Milgram conducted the experiment, the methodology, has also been criticised. The main critics of the methodological issues are Orne & Holland. They criticised Milgram on the grounds that the experiment had a lack of experimental realism, it had mundane realism, the participants showed demand characteristics and there were issues with generalisation. Orne and Holland said that Milgram's experiment had a lack of experimental realism. This means that people didn't take the experiment seriously because they didn't think it was real. However Sheridon & King performed a similar experiment using puppies instead of a human learner. The participants complained about the procedure and some people cried, this shows that the experiment had high experiment realism because people took it seriously. ...read more.

Conclusion

In 1971 they demonstrated the study in Germany, which again found an obedience rate of 85% from 101 males. In Australia in 1974 there was found to be only 40% obedience for males and 16% for females. Foster believes the reasons for the lower obedience rates are due to the fact that the victim was a student with long hair, the experimenter had a different status to that in Milgram's experiment and the female participants were asked to shock a female victim. Other studies in the USA in 1974, Spain in 1981, Austria in 1985 and Holland in 1986 showed high obedience rates of 85%, 90%, 80% and 92% respectively. Smith & Bond's results showed that cross-cultural variations of the experiment can alter the rate of obedience. This shows that Milgram's results cannot be generalised across the population. In conclusion, Milgram was criticised by Baumrind under the ethical grounds of not obtaining informed consent, deceiving his participants, not giving the right to withdraw, not protecting his participants against harm and not fully debriefing. Orne & Holland criticised the experiment's methodology saying there was a lack of experimental realism, it lacked ecological validity and the participants displayed demand characteristics. Milgram was further criticised because his sample was not representative of the population and he didn't demonstrate his experiment in other cultures. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level Social Psychology section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level Social Psychology essays

  1. Psychology Questions Ansewered

    The scanning techniques have a hard time distinguishing between what causes the coloured regions of the brain that shows up in the scans. The main findings of the Samuel and Bryant study were 1) Age affects the outcome of conservation, 2) Conditions affected the results of the study, and 3)

  2. Conformity and Obedience

    the participants were put under during the experiment, however it was to Milgram's credit that each one was given a full debriefing which included being reunited with Mr Wallace to show he was unharmed and they were reassured that no real shocks were given.

  1. Attractiveness and evaluation practical.

    ratings of physical attractiveness as a rough index of a persons social desirability. This study was conducted in a situation were single people were put together to find a partner not a friend. In this study there were sexual motives behind the choices made but in reality these sexual motives have little or no place when considering a friend.

  2. Analysis of the Milgram obedience experiment.

    Both the learner and the teacher received slips that they were told were given to them randomly, when in fact, both had been given slips that read "teacher."

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work