Evaluate Milgram's Study
Discuss Research Into Obedience (12 marks)
Milgram did a lab experiment, varying different situational pressures to see which had the greatest effect on obedience. He told 40 male volunteers that it was a study of how punishment affects learning. After drawing lots, the real participant was assigned the role of 'teacher'. The learner was a confederate. The teachers job was to administrate a learning task and deliver 'electric shocks' to the learner (in another room) if he got a question wrong. The shocks began at 15 volts and increased in increment of 15 volts to a maximum of 450 volts. The results showed 65% of Miligram's participants delivered the full (and fatal) 450 volt shock. Even though the learner gave out an agonised scream …show more content…
A weakness is that Milgram failed to protect his participants from psychological harm. Baumind (1964) attacked Milgram's study claiming that he had placed his participants under great emotional strain, causing psychological damage that could not be justified. Milgram defended himself by stating that he did not know how much stress participants would be under. Milgram also interviewed participants afterwards asking them if they had found the experiment distressing. At this point 84% were glad to have participated and 74% felt they had learned something of personal importance. Suggesting that the research was necessary to show the extreme of human obedience and that the psychological damage to participants was long-lasting. Another weakness of Milgram's research is that some psychologists believe it lacked realism, therefore affecting validity.
Psychologists such as Orne & Holland (1968) claim that participants in psychological studies have learned to mistrust researchers as they believe the true aims of the study may be hidden. In Milgrams research this means that participants may not truly have believed they were giving the learner electric shocks, and that this is the real reason for the high percentage. However, Milgram challenged this by interviewing
Milgram did a lab experiment, varying different situational pressures to see which had the greatest effect on obedience. He told 40 male volunteers that it was a study of how punishment affects learning. After drawing lots, the real participant was assigned the role of 'teacher'. The learner was a confederate. The teachers job was to administrate a learning task and deliver 'electric shocks' to the learner (in another room) if he got a question wrong. The shocks began at 15 volts and increased in increment of 15 volts to a maximum of 450 volts. The results showed 65% of Miligram's participants delivered the full (and fatal) 450 volt shock. Even though the learner gave out an agonised scream …show more content…
A weakness is that Milgram failed to protect his participants from psychological harm. Baumind (1964) attacked Milgram's study claiming that he had placed his participants under great emotional strain, causing psychological damage that could not be justified. Milgram defended himself by stating that he did not know how much stress participants would be under. Milgram also interviewed participants afterwards asking them if they had found the experiment distressing. At this point 84% were glad to have participated and 74% felt they had learned something of personal importance. Suggesting that the research was necessary to show the extreme of human obedience and that the psychological damage to participants was long-lasting. Another weakness of Milgram's research is that some psychologists believe it lacked realism, therefore affecting validity.
Psychologists such as Orne & Holland (1968) claim that participants in psychological studies have learned to mistrust researchers as they believe the true aims of the study may be hidden. In Milgrams research this means that participants may not truly have believed they were giving the learner electric shocks, and that this is the real reason for the high percentage. However, Milgram challenged this by interviewing