soIiIoquy
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 2 years ago
#1
Can someone explain the aim, procedure and conclusions from this study + evaluation?

and also, do we have to learn the variations of the study for AQA psychology syllabus?
0
reply
soIiIoquy
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#2
Report Thread starter 2 years ago
#2
..............
0
reply
Pink fizz
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#3
Report 2 years ago
#3
(Original post by soIiIoquy)
..............
Don't bump your thread straight away and yes you do need to know the variations of his study. What do you already know about the aim, procedure, findings and conclusions?
0
reply
emma1404
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#4
Report 2 years ago
#4
Aim- to investigate whether ordinary people would follow orders of an unfair authority figure. He wanted to test the hypothesis that the Germans who followed Nazi orders were different; he hypothesised that anyone would have followed the orders put in the same position.
0
reply
soIiIoquy
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#5
Report Thread starter 2 years ago
#5
(Original post by Pink fizz)
Don't bump your thread straight away and yes you do need to know the variations of his study. What do you already know about the aim, procedure, findings and conclusions?
its urgent you see

im using the pink hair book aqa psych and my notes briefly go through the procedure but the book goes into so much detail so im stuck on how much i should write in my actual notes.

aim: to investigate the degree to which people prepared to obey a legitimate figure.
procedure: sample of 40 men, advertised , told they were taking part in study of memory, the experiment had 2 confederates, and the participant was the teacher.

my class notes aren't even complete and im unsure about whether i should use the book or simplypsychology
and in the book there are no variations but in my class notes it just says "there were 18 variations"
0
reply
emma1404
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#6
Report 2 years ago
#6
Procedure- He used 40 male participants by advertising for volunteers in a newspaper.
There were 3 roles; the experimenter- the authority figure played by a confederate, the teacher- who would test the learner and would administer punishments, and the learner who would receive the punishments if they got questions wrong played by a confederate.

The participant believed they were fairly assigned the role of teacher through drawing lots which was not the case as the learner was a confederate.
Participants were told to ask questions to the learner if they got them wrong they would ask them to shock them and increase the voltage each time up to 450volts.
Before the test the participant were given a ‘test shock’ to ensure they believed it was real.

The learner sat in another room and mainly gave incorrect answers. The learner remained silent until 300volt shock at this point they didn’t respond to the question but ponded on the wall instead and again at 315 volts. But then didn’t say anymore until after

If the participant refused to continue the experimenter gave verbal ‘prods’ to get them to continue such as ‘it is absolutely essential that you continue’
1
reply
Pink fizz
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#7
Report 2 years ago
#7
(Original post by soIiIoquy)
its urgent you see

im using the pink hair book aqa psych and my notes briefly go through the procedure but the book goes into so much detail so im stuck on how much i should write in my actual notes.

aim: to investigate the degree to which people prepared to obey a legitimate figure.
procedure: sample of 40 men, advertised , told they were taking part in study of memory, the experiment had 2 confederates, and the participant was the teacher.

my class notes aren't even complete and im unsure about whether i should use the book or simplypsychology
and in the book there are no variations but in my class notes it just says "there were 18 variations"
18?! I've never known anyone be taught more than 4. Reduced proximity, close proximity, location and uniform
0
reply
soIiIoquy
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#8
Report Thread starter 2 years ago
#8
(Original post by emma1404)
Procedure- He used 40 male participants by advertising for volunteers in a newspaper.
There were 3 roles; the experimenter- the authority figure played by a confederate, the teacher- who would test the learner and would administer punishments, and the learner who would receive the punishments if they got questions wrong played by a confederate.

The participant believed they were fairly assigned the role of teacher through drawing lots which was not the case as the learner was a confederate.
Participants were told to ask questions to the learner if they got them wrong they would ask them to shock them and increase the voltage each time up to 450volts.
Before the test the participant were given a ‘test shock’ to ensure they believed it was real.

The learner sat in another room and mainly gave incorrect answers. The learner remained silent until 300volt shock at this point they didn’t respond to the question but ponded on the wall instead and again at 315 volts. But then didn’t say anymore until after

If the participant refused to continue the experimenter gave verbal ‘prods’ to get them to continue such as ‘it is absolutely essential that you continue’
Thank you so much,

which variations do you have to learn?
0
reply
soIiIoquy
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#9
Report Thread starter 2 years ago
#9
(Original post by Pink fizz)
18?! I've never known anyone be taught more than 4. Reduced proximity, close proximity, location and uniform
i think there are 18 variations, but we only have to learn 4??

im so confused...
0
reply
emma1404
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#10
Report 2 years ago
#10
Findings/conclusions:
-65% of the teachers/participants went to the full 450volt shock
-100% teachers went to the full 300 volt shock
- only 5 out of 40 stopped at 300volt shock when the learner first objected
-14/40 participants showed nervous laughing fits
- all ps showed evidence of shaking, sweating and stuttering
- many p’s argued with the experimenter but continued to obey

The Germans ‘are different’ hypothesis is clearly false, Milgrams 40 p’s were ordinary Americans. Their high levels of obedience showed that people obey those regarded as authority figures. The results suggest that obeying those in authority is normal behaviour in a hierarchically organised society. We will obey orders that distress and go against our moral code.
0
reply
soIiIoquy
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#11
Report Thread starter 2 years ago
#11
(Original post by emma1404)
Findings/conclusions:
-65% of the teachers/participants went to the full 450volt shock
-100% teachers went to the full 300 volt shock
- only 5 out of 40 stopped at 300volt shock when the learner first objected
-14/40 participants showed nervous laughing fits
- all ps showed evidence of shaking, sweating and stuttering
- many p’s argued with the experimenter but continued to obey

The Germans ‘are different’ hypothesis is clearly false, Milgrams 40 p’s were ordinary Americans. Their high levels of obedience showed that people obey those regarded as authority figures. The results suggest that obeying those in authority is normal behaviour in a hierarchically organised society. We will obey orders that distress and go against our moral code.
omg thank you so much !


my school notes are terrible...
1
reply
emma1404
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#12
Report 2 years ago
#12
Variations- I was told 3

Proximity- 1. Teacher and learner in the same room- obedience rates dropped to 40%
2. The teacher had to force the learners hand on an electroshock plate - dropped to 30%
3. Experimenter left the room and gave instructions via telephone- dropped to 20.5% as some participants pretended to give shocks or give lower than supposed to

Location- conducted the experiment in a run down building- experimenter had less authority - fell to 47.5%

Uniform - in this the experimenter (who wore a lab coat) had to ‘leave’ the room and an ‘ordinary member of the public’ was brought in wearing everyday clothes - obedience rates dropped to 20%
0
reply
emma1404
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#13
Report 2 years ago
#13
It’s okay, I’m happy to help! 😊 Do you need any of the evaluation points?
1
reply
Pink fizz
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#14
Report 2 years ago
#14
(Original post by soIiIoquy)
i think there are 18 variations, but we only have to learn 4??

im so confused...
There's only four on the specification so they're the only ones you need to know
0
reply
soIiIoquy
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#15
Report Thread starter 2 years ago
#15
(Original post by emma1404)
It’s okay, I’m happy to help! 😊 Do you need any of the evaluation points?

You're really good at psychology!

i have 5 evaluation points:

low internal validity, good external validity, supporting replication, an alternative explanation( social identity theory), and ethical issues


which 3 are the easiest evaluation points?

if so, could you expand and give a PEE evaluation?


Thank youuu xoxoxo
0
reply
soIiIoquy
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#16
Report Thread starter 2 years ago
#16
(Original post by Pink fizz)
There's only four on the specification so they're the only ones you need to know
ahh okay thanks
0
reply
emma1404
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#17
Report 2 years ago
#17
Lack of internal validity is a good one-
A criticism of Milgrams original study is that many of the participants worked out the procedure was faked. It is more likely that participants in Milgrams variations realised this because of the extra manipulation. A good example is the variation where the experimenter is replaced by a ‘member of the public’. Even Milgram recognised that this situation was so forced that some participants at have worked out the truth. Therefore this is a limitation of all Milgrams studies because it is unclear whether the results are genuine due to the operation of obedience or because the participants saw through the deception and acted accordingly. (Also demand characteristics)
0
reply
emma1404
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#18
Report 2 years ago
#18
I’m not sure about the other ones you have I think we’ve been taught different ones.

I have that there’s other research to support, cross-cultural replications and that it creates an obedience alibi
0
reply
soIiIoquy
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#19
Report Thread starter 2 years ago
#19
(Original post by emma1404)
Lack of internal validity is a good one-
A criticism of Milgrams original study is that many of the participants worked out the procedure was faked. It is more likely that participants in Milgrams variations realised this because of the extra manipulation. A good example is the variation where the experimenter is replaced by a ‘member of the public’. Even Milgram recognised that this situation was so forced that some participants at have worked out the truth. Therefore this is a limitation of all Milgrams studies because it is unclear whether the results are genuine due to the operation of obedience or because the participants saw through the deception and acted accordingly. (Also demand characteristics)
right, yeah this is great, i can actually understand this evaluative point. my book is wayyy too detailed for me

thank you xo
0
reply
emma1404
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#20
Report 2 years ago
#20
I hope I helped, sorry about not being able to help you with the rest of the evaluation points though xo
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Current uni students - are you thinking of dropping out of university?

Yes, I'm seriously considering dropping out (94)
13.78%
I'm not sure (32)
4.69%
No, I'm going to stick it out for now (214)
31.38%
I have already dropped out (16)
2.35%
I'm not a current university student (326)
47.8%

Watched Threads

View All