Exam (elaborations) ( 16 mark) Social Influence Milgram AQA Psychology for A Level Year 2
4 views 0 purchase
Course
Social Influence
Institution
AQA
Book
AQA Psychology for A Level Year 2
This is a 16 mark question based on social influence in Milgram's study. It covers A03 and A01. There are strengths and Limitations and is nearly awarded full marks.
Gender and Culture Bias AQA ExamPro Questions by Topic
Holism and Reductionism AQA ExamPro Questions by Topic
All for this textbook (168)
Written for
A/AS Level
AQA
Psychology
Social Influence
All documents for this subject (605)
Seller
Follow
mayasultana
Reviews received
Content preview
Describe and Evaluate Milgram’s research into obedience.
Milgram (1963) investigated the effects into conformity with presence of an authority figure. This
was advocated with his original study of obedience. Milgram wanted to find the answer to
obedience and why individuals would conform to evil acts. The procedure obligated 40 male
participants that used volunteer sampling with a newspaper advert. It endured the sense of shocks.
There were two confederates. One was the learner whilst the other was the researcher. The
participant would play as the teacher. Every time the learner got a question wrong, they were
shocked and this was prohibited by the 4 prods. The findings represented the percentage amount of
shocks. 100% shopped at 300 volts and 65% stopped at 450 volts. Milgram had questioned university
students who study psychology and this only totalled 3%. This had shown that authority effects
conformity levels which leads to behavioural changes and obedience.
One limitation of the research is that is contained low internal validity. Participants believed that the
shocks weren’t real as led to a lack of validity. Orne and Holland in 1968 had collected research from
this, agreeing that it didn’t “feel real” Another critic by Gina Perry backs this point. She has listened
to the tapes and finalised the resist that participants admitted to had doubts about the shock. This
was an essential problem for Milgram as there was a lack of realness and support from his
participants that were to help with the validity of his research, so the result cannot be generalised as
it may be inaccurate to a participant’s opinion. However, there are supports for the experimental
study that back the point of it being valid. The experiment was replicated into pupped by King in the
1970’s. 100% of females delivered fatal shock. However, the experiment cannot be replicated
towards a puppy compared to a human as they don’t believe that its real.
However, the research DID hold good external validity instead of internal. This was evidenced with
Hoffling et al who had studied an experiment in a hospital ward. This was focused on the
relationship between an authority figure and a participant. A confederate was disguised as a doctor
in a hospital ward and was giving unjustified demands to nurses. As he was a “doctor” the nurses
obliged to it leading to the support of external validity. This is a strength as the results have shown
that 21/22 (95%) of the nurses obliged to unjust demands and controlled the level of obedience,
which in turn supports Milgram’s research as the experiment can be generalised in outside setting as
well as internal settings such as a lab. This helps to operate findings in real life settings.
Another strength of the research is that it is replicated into modern time studies too. This is
supported by TV shows. For example, A French show called the game of death had replicated this
study into their contestants to give fake shocks to the presenter. Like Milgram, intron 80% gave
shocks to participants who was apparently an “unconscious man” this is a strength as it replicates
Milgram’s findings of obedience with author figure to modern day settings and is replicated too.
One limitation of the experiment is that it holds Ethical issues with the participants that perpetuates
psychological harm. Diana in 1964 was critical in the ways that Milgram has deceived his
participants. He first has advertised the experiment as a “memory” test advocating deceitful
behaviour and then in turn, the experiment clearly had caused psychological harm during the
debriefing. 84£ of the participants were glad to participate whereas 16% wished they didn’t. This
meant that those who were debriefed may have faced psychological harm such as PTSD from the
experiment. This is a limitation as it’s a grand ethical issue since participants were harmed.
The benefits of buying summaries with Stuvia:
Guaranteed quality through customer reviews
Stuvia customers have reviewed more than 700,000 summaries. This how you know that you are buying the best documents.
Quick and easy check-out
You can quickly pay through credit card or Stuvia-credit for the summaries. There is no membership needed.
Focus on what matters
Your fellow students write the study notes themselves, which is why the documents are always reliable and up-to-date. This ensures you quickly get to the core!
Frequently asked questions
What do I get when I buy this document?
You get a PDF, available immediately after your purchase. The purchased document is accessible anytime, anywhere and indefinitely through your profile.
Satisfaction guarantee: how does it work?
Our satisfaction guarantee ensures that you always find a study document that suits you well. You fill out a form, and our customer service team takes care of the rest.
Who am I buying these notes from?
Stuvia is a marketplace, so you are not buying this document from us, but from seller mayasultana. Stuvia facilitates payment to the seller.
Will I be stuck with a subscription?
No, you only buy these notes for $7.12. You're not tied to anything after your purchase.
