Hofling Prison Experiment
HOFLING HOSPITAL EXPERIMENT
Hofling 1966
He wanted to see if nurses would follow orders given by an authority figure (Doctor) when the orders are given over the phone and would be breaking regulations. To study obedience in a real life setting.
-The experiment involved public and private hospital wards. In Hospital ONE; 21 student nurses and 12 graduate nurses were asked to complete a questionnaire asking them what they would do if confronted by the experimental situation. This was to be the control group to make comparisons.
-In total 22 nurses took part in the experiment, they did not know about the study. Between 7pm-9pm night shift, the nurses received a phone call from a unknown doctor asking them to administer a drug to a patient- (astroten). The amount of drug they were asked to give would have been an overdose, (it was a placebo). They were asked to give 20mg, the box was labelled maximum daily dose 10mg. The drug was also not authorized for the ward the nurses were working on and nurses should not carry out orders given over the phone.
-The call ended when the nurse complied; the nurse refused; the nurse referred them to someone else; if they became …show more content…
This begs the question, was the determinant of this behaviour; dispositional or situational Milgram claimed that there was no significant dispositional differences (based on sex (women reported feeling more guilty), personality, politics, religion, occupation, education, military service, or psychological characteristics. Therefore, the main determinant must be situational. Factors which support this are: remoteness of the experimenter reduced obedience when the experiment was moved from university to a downtown office. Obedience rates dropped from 65% to less than 20%. This demonstrated the situational effect as a reinforcer of the agentic
Hofling 1966
He wanted to see if nurses would follow orders given by an authority figure (Doctor) when the orders are given over the phone and would be breaking regulations. To study obedience in a real life setting.
-The experiment involved public and private hospital wards. In Hospital ONE; 21 student nurses and 12 graduate nurses were asked to complete a questionnaire asking them what they would do if confronted by the experimental situation. This was to be the control group to make comparisons.
-In total 22 nurses took part in the experiment, they did not know about the study. Between 7pm-9pm night shift, the nurses received a phone call from a unknown doctor asking them to administer a drug to a patient- (astroten). The amount of drug they were asked to give would have been an overdose, (it was a placebo). They were asked to give 20mg, the box was labelled maximum daily dose 10mg. The drug was also not authorized for the ward the nurses were working on and nurses should not carry out orders given over the phone.
-The call ended when the nurse complied; the nurse refused; the nurse referred them to someone else; if they became …show more content…
This begs the question, was the determinant of this behaviour; dispositional or situational Milgram claimed that there was no significant dispositional differences (based on sex (women reported feeling more guilty), personality, politics, religion, occupation, education, military service, or psychological characteristics. Therefore, the main determinant must be situational. Factors which support this are: remoteness of the experimenter reduced obedience when the experiment was moved from university to a downtown office. Obedience rates dropped from 65% to less than 20%. This demonstrated the situational effect as a reinforcer of the agentic