1. Explain and discuss the background events and ideas which led to Milgram’s research. Stanley Milgram (1963) was a American social psychologist who carried out the destructive obedience experiment at Yale University in 1963. He was very interested in how far people would go in a situation where it meant hurting another person under an authority figures orders. If an authority figure affected obedience levels in everyday American men. This idea came about after Adolf Eichmann's trial in Jerusalem in 1961. Milgram wanted to know if the German Soldiers were unique in obeying Hitler's orders in World War 2 or if these unjust acts could be committed again with ordinary American citizens. (Men)
2. What was the main hypothesis/purpose of the …show more content…
Describe the methodology used, and from this, describe the procedures, steps and recorded findings, both documented and observed, to evaluate the study- including the dependent (DV), independent variables (IV) and behavioural observations documented in regards to participant obedience. Milgram's study was an experiment of controlled observation. The procedure was well standardised and obedience was accurately operationalised. Milgram believed that Obedience was so ingrained in Human minds, and they they tend to conform and obey orders of an authority figure. This was a Laboratory experiment using a self selected sample. At the beginning of the study the two participants were introduced to each other and were told and led to believe that this experiment was examining the effects of punishment on learning. Although the teacher did not know it, the experiment was rigged meaning that it was Pre planned. Mr Wallace knew the purpose of the experiment and would always be the learner when the paper was pulled out of the hat. The naive participant didn’t know that the experiment was truly looking at how ordinary individuals obey authority figures, even if it means harming another human being. In this case an “electric shock”. The experimenter then took the learner (Mr Wallace) a separate room and strapped him into the chair and then attached his wrists to the shock plates. The teacher was allowed to watch this preparation and heard that Mr Wallace had a heart problem which …show more content…
Hoflings aim was to see whether nurses would follow orders given by an authority figure (doctor) when the orders are given over the phone and would be breaking real life regulations. He created a more realistic study compared to Milligrams.Holfings hypothesis was that when the experiment took place, nurses would refuse to administer the unknown drug for “Doctor Smith” because it goes against every ethical boundary within the nurse profession. It is a legal obligation to defer any directive over the the phone, overdose an unknown drug or administer it on behalf of a senior. The results of this experiment showed that 21 out of the 22 nurses were easily influenced into carrying orders from an “authority” figure over the
2. What was the main hypothesis/purpose of the …show more content…
Describe the methodology used, and from this, describe the procedures, steps and recorded findings, both documented and observed, to evaluate the study- including the dependent (DV), independent variables (IV) and behavioural observations documented in regards to participant obedience. Milgram's study was an experiment of controlled observation. The procedure was well standardised and obedience was accurately operationalised. Milgram believed that Obedience was so ingrained in Human minds, and they they tend to conform and obey orders of an authority figure. This was a Laboratory experiment using a self selected sample. At the beginning of the study the two participants were introduced to each other and were told and led to believe that this experiment was examining the effects of punishment on learning. Although the teacher did not know it, the experiment was rigged meaning that it was Pre planned. Mr Wallace knew the purpose of the experiment and would always be the learner when the paper was pulled out of the hat. The naive participant didn’t know that the experiment was truly looking at how ordinary individuals obey authority figures, even if it means harming another human being. In this case an “electric shock”. The experimenter then took the learner (Mr Wallace) a separate room and strapped him into the chair and then attached his wrists to the shock plates. The teacher was allowed to watch this preparation and heard that Mr Wallace had a heart problem which …show more content…
Hoflings aim was to see whether nurses would follow orders given by an authority figure (doctor) when the orders are given over the phone and would be breaking real life regulations. He created a more realistic study compared to Milligrams.Holfings hypothesis was that when the experiment took place, nurses would refuse to administer the unknown drug for “Doctor Smith” because it goes against every ethical boundary within the nurse profession. It is a legal obligation to defer any directive over the the phone, overdose an unknown drug or administer it on behalf of a senior. The results of this experiment showed that 21 out of the 22 nurses were easily influenced into carrying orders from an “authority” figure over the