Psychology Factsheets

www.curriculum-press.co.uk

Number 21

Evaluating Milgram (1963)

This Factsheet evaluates Milgrams (1963) study of obedience to authority. Obedience is a topic in social psychology (AQA and OCR specifications) and the social approach (Edexcel). This Factsheet evaluates Milgrams study by looking at its experimental method, the use of ethical procedures and other lines of evaluation. It relates to the Curriculum Press Factsheet 05 Obedience to authority.

What did Milgram do?

Stanley Milgram is most famous for his obedience studies. These studies created much controversy as they showed that ordinary people were so obedient to authority that they were willing to give electric shocks to a stranger. Some people would even give up to 450 volts! The Factsheet Obedience to authority describes in detail what Milgram did in his study. In this Factsheet, we will focus on the strengths and weaknesses of Milgrams study.

How do you evaluate Milgrams study?

Evaluating means to talk about the strengths and weaknesses of research. So, we will consider both the pluses and minuses of Milgrams study. Milgrams study is famous as it is criticised for: its experimental method its use of ethics. We will look at these points in turn below. We will then look at how we can evaluate Milgrams study in other ways.

A. Experimental method
This looks at the design of the experiment and how it was conducted. Milgrams study is mostly criticised for its experimental validity and its ecological validity.

1. Experimental validity
What is experimental validity? When psychologists talk about experimental validity they are asking whether the experiment does actually measure what it intends to measure. It is also known as internal validity. If Milgrams study has experimental validity, the participants should behave as they would normally do in that situation. So the experiment should really measure obedience in general.

2. Ecological validity
What is ecological validity? When psychologists talk about ecological validity they are asking how much the findings apply to a real-life setting and other situations. It is also known as external validity. Milgram did his original study in a laboratory setting. It is questioned whether the findings can be generalised to real-life settings. What evidence is there for ecological validity in Milgrams study? ! Milgram (1974) did do variations of the study in other settings (e.g., in a run-down office building instead of at Yale University). ! Participants did think that the experiment was real, so we can argue that it is ecologically valid. ! It is ecologically valid as cross-cultural studies produce the same findings. Smith and Bond (1993) collected findings from other countries and found the same results. In fact, some countries produced even higher levels of obedience. For example, in Spain 80% of participants gave the maximum shock. ! The findings have been replicated in more natural settings. For example, Bickman (1974) tested obedience on the streets of New York. Hofling and colleagues (1966) tested obedience in a hospital setting. Meeus and Raaijmakers (1995) examined obedience in a job interview setting (see Curriculum Press Factsheet 05 Obedience to authority for a description of Hofling et al. (1966) and Meeus and Raaijmakers (1995)).

What evidence is there for experimental validity in Milgrams study?

! The participants must have believed the task as they were willing to be given strong shocks (Turner and Solomon, 1962). ! Rosenhan (1969) found that almost 70% of participants did believe the set-up. " Orme and Holland (1968) claimed that Milgrams study lacked experimental validity. They proposed that Milgram found out more about how willing the participants were to obey the experimenter than about obedience in general. See text box below. ! Milgram said that the experiments do follow similar rules to social situations and so are true to life. " The participants were paid for taking part. Some critics say that payment for participation means that the participants are entering a contract. So Milgrams findings are evidence of obedience in a contract rather than of obedience in general. ! However, Milgram did inform the participants that they could leave and would still be paid anyway.

Imagine that you are in an unfamiliar situation; you would watch the people around you for clues on how you should behave. Orme and Holland (1968) suggest that this happens in Milgrams study, with the participants looking for cues about how they should behave. The participants may look for cues given out by the experimenter. So, it is possible that participants obeyed the experimenter because they felt that that was how they were expected to behave.

21 Evaluating Milgram (1963)

B. Ethical issues
What are ethics guidelines?
The British Psychological Society sets out guidelines on how to do experiments in an ethical way. These guidelines make sure that no experiment causes harm to anyone, either physically or mentally. Experimenters follow these guidelines as closely as possible. The ethical issues include; avoiding deception, debriefing, getting consent, the right to withdraw from the experiment and so on. Critics claim that Milgram broke ethical guidelines in four areas; (1) distress (2) deception (3) lack of informed consent (4) the right to withdraw. We will look at each of these in turn.

Psychology Factsheet
C. How else can we evaluate Milgram?
Milgram did follow other ethical procedures. For example, he did debrief his participants and assured them that their behaviour was normal. Debriefing is when the experimenter explains the purpose of the experiment to the participant at the end. There was much care in the follow-up study to assess the participants response to being in the experiment. Milgram was ahead of his time in using ethical scrutiny. He pioneered ethical committees which are now taken for granted (Blass, 2004). His findings did contribute to current thinking about obedience at the time. Also, they have had great impact on experimental research and theory since. The majority of obedience studies since Milgram involve some form of breaking the ethical guidelines (e.g., using deception). The findings of this study were not what were expected. Before he began the study, Milgram asked his psychology students to predict how many people would give the maximum shock of 450 volts. They predicted that only 3% of participants would give the maximum shock, in fact 65% did! Aronson (1988) claims that there would be no ethical objections if the findings were more acceptable. Baumrind (1964) suggested that the general population reacted strongly to Milgrams findings as they did not want to accept the implications that ordinary people could be so obedient to harm others. So they responded by shifting attention from the results to attacking the ethics used instead. The US army takes this issue seriously and uses it in two compulsory psychology courses for its Military Academy (Blass, 2004). Obedience is still a relevant topic today. Consider the recent case of the American soldiers who tortured Iraqi prisoners (in 2004) and claimed that they were just following orders.

1. Distress
Ethical guidelines state that participants must not be distressed in any way by the experimental procedure. Baumrind (1964) said that Milgram caused severe distress in his participants. Milgram said that he had not anticipated there being any distress before beginning the experiments. Milgram followed-up the participants one year after the study. They did not appear to have suffered any harm or distress. 84% said that they were glad to have participated, 15% were neutral whereas only 1.3% were sorry that they had participated. Furthermore, when psychiatrists interviewed 40 participants one year after the study, they found that the study has caused no harm.

2. Deception
Ethical guidelines state that experimenters should avoid deception unless there is extremely strong scientific justification for deceiving participants. Milgram did not tell the participants the true purpose of their role in the study; they thought that the shocks were real. Milgram stated that the deception was necessary otherwise the task would not seem real to the participants. Not seeming real would affect the end results.

3. Lack of informed consent

Ethical guidelines state that participants agree (consent) to take part themselves and that they know what is going to happen during the experiment. In Milgrams study, it is not possible to get informed consent because the participants do not have full knowledge about what is going to happen. This is because the study involves deception. However, Milgram did get presumptive consent. Presumptive consent means asking people beforehand if they think that a study would be acceptable to do. Milgram consulted psychiatrists and his students. 4. Right to withdraw Ethical guidelines state that participants have the freedom to leave or stop the experiment at any time. Coolican (1990) said that Milgram did not tell participants that they had the right to stop. He supports this by using the fact that the experimenter ordered participants to continue (e.g., It is absolutely essential that you continue). However, Milgram said that he did inform participants that they could leave and that they would get their money regardless.
Acknowledgements: This Psychology Factsheet was researched and written by Amanda Albon. The Curriculum Press, Bank House, 105 King Street, Wellington, Shropshire, TF1 1NU. Psychology Factsheets may be copied free of charge by teaching staff or students, provided that their school is a registered subscriber. No part of these Factsheets may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any other form or by any other means, without the prior permission of the publisher. ISSN 1351-5136

Exam Hints and Questions: An exam question is likely to ask you to evaluate Milgrams obedience study. Exam questions can also ask you to describe how psychologists deal with ethical issues in research or whether the findings justify the methods used to find them. Do not just criticise Milgram. Present a balanced view by also writing about his studys strengths. If the exam question says consider then you must use arguments from both sides of debate (for and against).

21. Evaluating Milgram (1963)

Psychology Factsheet

Worksheet: Evaluating Milgram(1963)

Name
1. Complete the following sentences: Milgram examined ______________ to authority in the year ______. Milgrams study is criticised for its ______________________________ and its use of ____________________.

2. Milgrams study is criticised for which two aspects of its method? ...................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ...................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ...................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 3. Give one criticism of its experimental validity. ...................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ...................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 4. Give one line of support for its experimental validity. ...................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ...................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 5. How might paying the participants for taking part affect Milgrams results? ...................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ...................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ...................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 6. Complete the table: Researchers What they did What they found

Smith and Bond (1993) Collected cross-cultural evidence

Bickman (1974)

Level of obedience varied with perceived authority

Examined obedience in a job interview situation

7. Which ethical procedures were said to have been broken in Milgrams study? ...................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ...................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ...................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 8. How could the general populations reaction to Milgrams findings affect how it is evaluated? ...................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ...................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................................................................................................