Samenvatting
1.1C People in Groups Summary Problem 6
- Instelling
- Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam (EUR)
This is a summary of the literature for Problem 6 of course 1.1C People in Groups.
[Meer zien]Voorbeeld 2 van de 5 pagina's
Voorbeeld 2 van de 5 pagina's
In winkelwagengesponsord bericht van onze partner
Verkoper
Volgen
Voorbeeld van de inhoud
Problem 61. What were the results of the Milgram experiment and would the result be
different if it were conducted today?
Milgram Experiment (1963)
• Subjects: 40 males
• Subject (teacher), confederate = victim (learner) & experimenter
• Subject did not know that victim was a confederate & thought he had been chosen as learner by
chance
• Subject asked victim questions & wrong answers would result in electric shock caused by the
subject (electric shocks were not real)
• Electric shock increases by the number of wrong answers & range from 15v. (Slight Shock) to
450v. (Severe Shock)
• Confederate started screaming at 300v-level
• Experimenter told subject to go on if he wanted to stop
• Experiment seemed self-assured
• Subject showed symptoms of stress (trembling, groaned bit their lips, dug fingernails into flesh,
seizures) → made sure subjects left experiment in a state of well-being by arranging reconciliation
between confederate & subject
• Results:
o 65 % administered the full 450v.
o Everyone resisted at some point
o No one broke off before 300v. (confederate started screaming at that level)
o No difference between men & women
• Explanations:
o Subject entered the experiment voluntarily → feels obligated to aid the experimenter
o Role of the learner was assigned under fair means (by chance)
→ under conditions of pressure from an authority, the majority of people will obey although they are not force
to
Would the results be different today?
Replicated study by Burger (2009)
• Tested 70 men & women in the U.S.
• 70% were obedient
• With confederate who refused → still 63,3 %
Study by Meeus & Raaijmakers (1995)
• Participants should cause psychological harm by making harassing remarks about confederate
• Told them it was part of a job interview of the confederate
o Confederate needed to pass the test in order to get the job
• Confederate ask participant to stop & became angry & later on despaired
• 92 % of participants continued after experimenter told them to go on
Study by Dolinski et al. (2015)
• Replicated Milgram study but had only 10 different shock steps (10 buttons)
• Conducted study in Poland (interesting to see if history & current political situation had an
impact)
• Wanted to see if the sex of the learner has an impact
o Participants 40 women & 40 men
, • Results:
o 90% pressed all 10 buttons
o When the learner was a women, the participants were 3 times more likely to stop
(sample size is to small to confirm theory)
→ there is no significant difference between today & Milgram’s findings
→ people are still obedient to the same extend
2. When do people decide to obey authorities, what are the causes &
consequences of obedience? (situational & personal factors, the appearance
authoritative figure)
Obedience
• Behaviour change produced by the commands of authority
Factors
• Immediacy of the victim
o How close or obvious is the victim to the participant?
o Milgram trial: confederate was in the same room as subject
§ Obedience dropped to 40%
o Milgram trial: subject set next to the confederate & pressed hand of confederate down
on a shock plate
§ Refused after 150v
§ 30% continued after getting an insulted glove
o Milgram trial: confederate shouts & bangs against the wall
§ Reduced obedience slightly to 62,5 % who obeyed to 450v-level
→ obedience decreases as immediacy increases
→ immediacy prevents dehumanisation of the victim & makes it easier to show empathy
→ social norms become accessible again
• Immediacy of the authority figure
o Milgram trial: experimenter gave instructions over the phone
§ 25 % stopped as soon as confederate requested release (150v)
§ 20% continued to 450v
→ obedience decreases as the authority figure’s influence decreases with distance
→ obedience norm has no influence anymore
• Legitimacy of the authority figure
o Experimenter was wearing lab-coat which made him look professional
o Experimenter seemed self-assured so subject was convinced he knows what he is doing
§ Appearance of the experimenter leads subject to trust his judgment
§ Seventh trial: experiment was moved to an office building (no professional
environment compared to university)
• Obedience dropped to 48%
→ professional appearance & location lets people trust in experimenter’s decisions
o Experiment by Bickman (1974)
§ Stopped pedestrians on the street & ordered them to do something unusual
Voordelen van het kopen van samenvattingen bij Stuvia op een rij:
Verzekerd van kwaliteit door reviews
Stuvia-klanten hebben meer dan 700.000 samenvattingen beoordeeld. Zo weet je zeker dat je de beste documenten koopt!
Snel en makkelijk kopen
Je betaalt supersnel en eenmalig met iDeal, creditcard of Stuvia-tegoed voor de samenvatting. Zonder lidmaatschap.
Focus op de essentie
Samenvattingen worden geschreven voor en door anderen. Daarom zijn de samenvattingen altijd betrouwbaar en actueel. Zo kom je snel tot de kern!
Veelgestelde vragen
Wat krijg ik als ik dit document koop?
Je krijgt een PDF, die direct beschikbaar is na je aankoop. Het gekochte document is altijd, overal en oneindig toegankelijk via je profiel.
Tevredenheidsgarantie: hoe werkt dat?
Onze tevredenheidsgarantie zorgt ervoor dat je altijd een studiedocument vindt dat goed bij je past. Je vult een formulier in en onze klantenservice regelt de rest.
Van wie koop ik deze samenvatting?
Stuvia is een marktplaats, je koop dit document dus niet van ons, maar van verkoper elenakuhn. Stuvia faciliteert de betaling aan de verkoper.
Zit ik meteen vast aan een abonnement?
Nee, je koopt alleen deze samenvatting voor €3,48. Je zit daarna nergens aan vast.
Is Stuvia te vertrouwen?
4,6 sterren op Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)
Afgelopen 30 dagen zijn er 67096 samenvattingen verkocht
Opgericht in 2010, al 14 jaar dé plek om samenvattingen te kopen