Social Psychology – Milgram’s study

To research how far people would go in obeying an instruction if it involved harming another person. Milgram was interested in how easily ordinary people could be influenced to commit attrocities e.g. germans in ww2

Volunteers were recruited using an advertisement for a study investigating learning. Participants were 40 males aged 20 to 50 from a range of jobs in New Haven. They were payed $4.50 for turning up. They were introduced to a confederate. They drew straws to see who was the learner and teacher (this was fixed). The confederate was always the learner. Their was also another confederate who played the experimenter.

The learner confederate was strapped to the shock generator. The teacher was given a 45 volt shock to show him what it would be like. The learner had to learn a list of word pairs then the teacher had to test him. Each time the learner got one wrong the teacher had to give an electric shock to him. This increased by 15 volts each time the learner got one wrong. The generator went up to 450v. The learner gave wrong answers on purpose. If the teacher refused to give the shock the experimenter have a series of prods to ensure they continue e.g. the experiment requires you continue.

65% of participants continued to the highest level of 450v. All participants continued to 300v.

Ordinary people are likely to follow orders given by an authority figure even to the extent of killing an innocent person.

The participants were all male within a specific age group. The data obtained cannot be generalised to the whole population.

The experiment was reliable because it was repeated a number of times and different variations were carried out.

The study can be applied to real life situations such as the Mai Lai Massacre or word war 2. It may explain the behaviours of the soldiers and those of authority.

The study was experimentally valid as it was standardised and controlled. However the study lacked ecological validity as the participants were aware they were being studied. The study lacked mundane realism.

The study was not ethical. Participants were not protected from psychological harm and were not given the right to withdraw. Some participants experienced anxiety while being asked to administer shocks.