1. L.O Examine the SITUATIONAL factors that lead to obedience

2. Cohen & Davis (1981): A physician ordered ear drops to be administered to the right ear of a hospitalised patient suffering pain and infection there.
On the prescription, the doctor abbreviated it so that the instructions read ‘place in R ear’.
Unfortunately, the physicians letter spacing was slightly less than ideal
The nurse followed instructions to the letter, neither she nor the patient questioning the doctor’s decision.

3. Conformity Obedience What is it? Who ‘asks’? Why do we do it?
Conformity
Obedience
What is it?
Going along with the crowd/yielding to group pressure
Behaving as instructed
Who ‘asks’?
Nobody, we act to please peers, friends, social group
Authority figures: parents, teachers , police, government etc.
Why do we do it?
To be accepted, liked or
to avoid becoming ‘outsiders’
To avoid punishment or unpleasant consequences

4. Milgram’s (1963): Obedience to Authority
People were randomly assigned the role of “teacher” in a “learning experiment.”
The experimenter asked them to administer negative reinforcements in the form of electric shocks to a ‘learner’ (a confederate of experimenter, and a nice man) who goes to an adjacent room.
The level of the shocks was increased at each mistake with 15 volts, from 15 (marked on the machine as “slight shock”) to 450 volts (marked on the machine as “danger: severe shock”).
As the shocks get worse, the learner protests more and more, then refuses to answer.
Experimenter orders learners to continue administering shocks.

5. “Please continue/please go on”
“The experiment requires that you continue”
“It is absolutely essential that you continue”
“You have no other choice, you must go on”

6. How far will people go?
65% of Ps went all the way up to 450V marked XXX!

7. “I observed a mature and initially poised businessman enter the laboratory smiling and confident. Within 20 minutes he was reduced to a twitching, shuddering wreck, who was rapidly approaching nervous collapse. He constantly pulled on his ear lobe, and twisted his hands. At one point he pushed his fist into his forehead and muttered ‘Oh God, lets stop it’. An yet he continued to respond to every word of the experimenter, and obeyed to the end”.
Milgram

8. Variations on Milgram (1974)
Immediacy of the victim (‘awareness of plight’):
If the victim could only be heard, 65% of teachers went to the limit. If they had visual contact, that number declined.
However, even when teacher had to keep the learner’s hand on a “shock plate”, 30% continued to administer shocks up to 450V.
Immediacy/ proximity of authority figure:
When the experimenter delivered instructions by phone, only 20.5% continued to obey.
Social influences:
If a second ‘teacher’ was present who complied, obedience soared to 92% full compliance. If the other refused, only 10% of Ps went up to 450V.
Legitimacy of authority:
When the experiment was conducted in a run down office building obedience dropped to 48%.

9. Hofling (1966)
Hofling wanted to test the Ecological Validity of the Milgram tests (i.e. were the results due to artificial situation, or would the same results apply in real life situation?)
He enlisted the help of several hospitals in USA and arranged for a memo to be sent to all nurses reminding them of their responsibilities regarding changes in medication for patients:
When given instructions, ensure the doctor signs the instructions.
If you do not know the doctor, check their ID.
Check the maximum dosage on all medication before administering.
A bottle of made-up pills would then be placed in the medicine cabinet, labelled "ASTROFEN 5mg Max 10mg per 24 hours". A fake patient was then planted in the ward.

10. Phones the ward when a nurse was working alone saying: "Hello, this is Dr Smith. You have my patient, Mr X. I have been held up on my rounds, please give 20mg Astrofen immediately, I will be up later to sign the papers".
21 of 22 nurses were prepared to disregard three very important rules and administer a potentially lethal dose to a patient, on the word of an unknown doctor by a telephone call. 
However, in Rank & Jacobson (1975) only 1/18 did so when:
A real drug was prescribed
A real doctor from ward phones the order
Nurses were not alone, were able to consult with colleagues
Highlights importance of Ecological Validity in research
and consultation with others

11. So why do people obey?
Legitimacy of Authority – Bickman (1974) Power of Uniforms
Gradual commitment – having committed to one course of action (i.e. the early ‘low’ shock to teach), it is difficult to say no to following requests (aka ‘the foot in the door effect’).
Agentic Shift – when an individual moves from an autonomous (independent, thinking for themselves) to an agentic state where they now see themselves as acting on behalf of another who takes responsibility for our action.
The role of ‘Buffers’ – barriers (physical or psychological) that distance us from the consequences of our action (e.g. physical barriers, or using justifications or de-humanisation)
Isolation from Dissention / Social Reference

12. Reflecting on Milgram’s contribution
Milgram’s experiments are powerful because they were very simple, very real, and very unsettling.
This research is very typical for 1970s research in its emphasis on the darker side of human nature:
It paints a very bleak picture of what people are like.
Social influence is equated with something that is negative and extreme.
Individualism is celebrated.
Milgram’s experiments also contributed to the end of high impact social psychological research because of the ethical issues they raised.

13. BPS Ethical Guidelines
Consent: should inform all Ps of the objectives of the research.
Confidentiality: must keep all information obtained from the Ps confidential, unless agreed otherwise.
Deception: should not withhold or mislead the Ps if they are likely to object to this deception during debrief.
Debriefing: must debrief the Ps before they leave the setting. Debrief does not provide a justification for unethical aspects of the research.
Observations - must only observe Ps in environments that people would expect to be observed by strangers or with prior consent.
Protection- must protect Ps from any physical or emotion harm.
Withdrawal: must make it clear to the Ps that they have a right to withdraw from the experiment at any time during the research.

14. Social Psychology Research & Ethics
 Evaluate ethical problems encountered with social research.
Consent – Lacked informed consent - Milgram / Asch
Deception – Asch / Milgram
Withdrawal – Milgram = authority figure was intimidating; Zimbardo = it was pretty much forgotten!
Protection of participants – Milgram = psychological distress; Zimbardo = physical & psychological harm.
‘Cost benefit analysis’ – Ends justifying the means?
 Were the findings ‘worth it’?

15. Exam Question
1) Milgram’s work into obedience provided us with valuable insights into why people obey, even though it was carried out in a laboratory.
Outline two explanations of why people obey. (4)
Milgram’s work can be criticised for being unethical. Describe one way in which his work is unethical. (2)
Apart from ethical issues, give one strength and one limitation of Milgram’s methodology. (4)
2) Explain what is meant by internalisation in the context of
conformity. (2) AND Explain what is meant by compliance in the context of conformity. (2)
3) Outline one method used to study conformity (2); one limitation of this method (2); an appropriate way of overcoming it (2).

16. DO THESE EXAM QUESTIONS FIRST BEFORE YOU TURN OVER FOR MARKSCHEME

17. Exam Question
Milgram’s work into obedience provided us with valuable insights into why people obey, even though it was carried out in a laboratory.
Outline two explanations of why people obey. (4)
1 mark for identification and a further mark for elaboration (x 2).
• Agentic state – the individual sees himself or herself as the agent
carrying out the order.
• Gradual commitment – having agreed to do something, difficult
to then change mind. Similar to the “foot-in-the-door” technique.
• Legitimate authority – whereby the person giving the order is seen to
have the right to do so.
• Presence of buffers – a buffer is anything that prevents the person
from having to acknowledge the consequences of their actions.

18. Exam Question
Milgram’s work into obedience provided us with valuable insights into why people obey, even though it was carried out in a laboratory.
b) Milgram’s work can be criticised for being unethical. Describe one way in which his work is unethical. (2)
• Deception – participants were deceived in many ways, the initial
advert, the selection of teacher and learner, the fake shocks etc.
• Lack of informed consent – because they were deceived participants
could not give their full informed consent.
• Harm – some participants suffered extreme stress reactions, as well
as embarrassment and the feelings of being used

19. Exam Question
c) Apart from ethical issues, give one strength and one limitation of Milgram’s methodology. (4) Strengths of Milgram’s methodology: • Can easily be replicated, therefore reliability can be assessed. • It is easier to control the variables, so that it is only the independent variable that is being manipulated. • Can determine whether the IV does cause the DV to change, causal conclusions can be drawn. Limitations of Milgram’s methodology: • As the situation is often artificial, there is a loss of external validity. • Demand characteristics may cause participants to behave in ways that are not normal. • Investigator effects can also cause participants to behave differently.

20. Exam Question
 a) Explain what is meant by internalisation in the context of conformity. (2)
Internalisation is where the behaviour or belief of the majority is accepted by the individual and becomes part of his or her own belief system. It is the more permanent form of conformity.
b) Explain what is meant by compliance in the context of conformity. (2)
 Compliance is where the individuals change their own behaviour to fit in with the group. They may not necessarily agree with the behaviour/belief but they go along with it publicly.

21. - To overcome lack of ecological validity conduct the experiment in
Exam Question
 Outline one method used to study conformity (2); one limitation of this method (2); an appropriate way of overcoming it (2).
- The most likely method offered is an experiment (such as those
carried out by Asch). Laboratory experiment (1 mark) where
confederates deliberately gave the wrong answer to see if the naïve
participant conformed (+1). Could either refer to a research method in
general, or they could describe the procedures of a particular study.
- The limitation will depend on the method given in (a). Lab
experiments lack ecological validity (1 mark) this means that the
findings cannot be generalised to the real world (+1).
- To overcome lack of ecological validity conduct the experiment in
the real world (1 mark) by setting up a field experiment so people
behave as they would do normally (1 further mark).

22. Isolation from Dissention / Lac k of Social Reference
Factors in Obedience
Cultural and Personality Factors:
- Cultural variations have been reported.
- Authoritarian Personality more likely to obey authority. Elm & Milgram found support in interviewing Ps from original experiments
Legitimacy of Authority
Agentic Shift –moving from autonomous to agentic state where we carry out the will of a figure of authority who takes responsibility for our action.
Bickman (1974) - ‘the power of uniforms’, male security uniform (92%)
VS street cloths (49%)
Critiques of Milgram’s Conclusions:
- Mandel (1998): Milgram provides an ‘Obedience Alibi’ for those committing brutal crimes under orders by claiming they were ‘just following orders’.
Berkowitz (1999): Milgram (& Zimbardo) present a purely ‘Situationlist Perspective’ of evil, where ordinary people can do evil under pressure, but does not account for ‘Personal Choices’ & the motivations of ‘bad people’ to do ‘bad things’.
- In essence, they both accuse Milgram of Reductionism; reducing complex and multi-causal behaviours (brutality) to a singular reason (social pressure/environment)
Gradual commitment – having committed to a course of action, difficult to say no to following requests.
Bushman (1988) – female police uniform (70%) VS smart clothing (58%)
‘Buffers’ – barriers that distance us from consequences of our action. 
Legitimacy of authority
Isolation from Dissention / Lac k of Social Reference
Sedikides & Jackson (1990)
testing ‘Social Impact Theory’ (Strength & Immediacy) in zoo, keeper uniform and/or proximity; High I&S had most obedience.
Immediacy of authority
Milgram (1963)
& Variations (1974) 
Immediacy of the victim
Orne & Holland (1968) –
criticisms of methodology;
Validity / Demand Characteristics
Social influences
Further
Validity
Criticisms
Hofling et al (1966) - ‘Dr Smith’ ordering 20mg of ‘Astroten’ over the phone. 21 of 22 nurses obeyed.
Rank & Jacobson (1977) – repeated Hofling study, but using: Real drug, Real doctor, Nurses have chance to consult another. Only 1 of 18 obeyed.

23. Isolation from Dissention / Lac k of Social Reference
Factors in Obedience
Cultural and Personality Factors:
- Cultural variations have been reported.
Authoritarian Personality more likely to obey authority. Same for those with External Locus of Control.
Critiques of Milgram’s Conclusions:
- Mandel (1998): Milgram provides an ‘Obedience Alibi’ for those committing brutal crimes under orders …by claiming they were ‘just following orders’.
Berkowitz (1999): Milgram (& Zimbardo) present a purely ‘Situationlist Perspective’ of evil, where...… ordinary people can do evil under pressure, but does not account for ‘Personal Choices’ & the motivations of ‘bad people’ to do ‘bad things’.
- In essence, they both accuse Milgram of Reductionism; reducing complex and multi-causal behaviours (brutality)… to a singular reason (social pressure/environment)
Legitimacy of Authority
Agentic Shift –moving from autonomous to agentic state where we carry out the will of a figure of authority who takes responsibility for our action.
Bickman (1974) - ‘the power of uniforms’, male security uniform (92%)
VS street cloths (49%)
Gradual commitment – having committed to a course of action, difficult to say no to following requests.
Bushman (1988) – obeying female police uniform (70%) VS smart clothing (58%)
‘Buffers’ – barriers that distance us from consequences of our action. 
Legitimacy of authority
Isolation from Dissention / Lac k of Social Reference
Immediacy of authority
Sedikides & Jackson (1990)
testing ‘Social Impact Theory’ (Strength & Immediacy) in zoo through… keeper uniform and/or proximity. High I&S had most obedience.
Milgram (1963)
& Variations (1974) 
Immediacy of the victim
Orne & Holland (1968) –
criticisms of methodology;
Validity / Demand Characteristics
Social influences
Further
Validity
Criticisms
Hofling et al (1966) - ‘Dr Smith’ ordering 20mg of ‘Astroten’ over the phone. 21 of 22 nurses obeyed.
Rank & Jacobson (1977) – repeated Hofling study, but using: Real drug, Real doctor, Nurses have chance to consult another. Only 1 of 18 obeyed.

24. ordinary people can do evil under pressure, but does not account for ‘Personal Choices’ & the motivations of ‘bad people’ to do ‘bad things’.
ordinary people can do evil under pressure, but does not account for ‘Personal Choices’ & the motivations of ‘bad people’ to do ‘bad things’.
Authoritarian Personality more likely to obey authority. Same for those with External Locus of Control.
Authoritarian Personality more likely to obey authority. Same for those with External Locus of Control.
Agentic Shift –moving from autonomous to agentic state where we carry out the will of a figure of authority who takes responsibility for our action.
keeper uniform and/or proximity. High I&S had most obedience.
Agentic Shift –moving from autonomous to agentic state where we carry out the will of a figure of authority who takes responsibility for our action.
keeper uniform and/or proximity. High I&S had most obedience.
‘the power of uniforms’, male security uniform (92%) VS street cloths (49%)
‘the power of uniforms’, male security uniform (92%) VS street cloths (49%)
‘Buffers’ – barriers that distance us from consequences of our action.
‘Buffers’ – barriers that distance us from consequences of our action.
to a singular reason (social pressure/ environment)
to a singular reason (social pressure/ environment)
repeated Hofling study, but using: Real drug, Real doctor, Nurses have chance to consult another. Only 1 of 18 obeyed.
repeated Hofling study, but using: Real drug, Real doctor, Nurses have chance to consult another. Only 1 of 18 obeyed.
Isolation from Dissention / Lac k of Social Reference
Isolation from Dissention / Lac k of Social Reference
by claiming they were ‘just following orders’.
by claiming they were ‘just following orders’.
Gradual commitment – having committed to a course of action, difficult to say no to following requests.
Gradual commitment – having committed to a course of action, difficult to say no to following requests.
Legitimacy of Authority
Legitimacy of Authority
‘Dr Smith’ ordering 20mg of ‘Astroten’ over the phone. 21 of 22 nurses obeyed.
‘Dr Smith’ ordering 20mg of ‘Astroten’ over the phone. 21 of 22 nurses obeyed.
obeying female police uniform (70%) VS smart clothing (58%)
obeying female police uniform (70%) VS smart clothing (58%)