PMT

Psychology Factsheets
www.curriculum-press.co.uk Number 21
Evaluating Milgram (1963)
This Factsheet evaluates Milgram’s (1963) study of obedience to authority. Obedience is a topic in social psychology (AQA and OCR
specifications) and the social approach (Edexcel). This Factsheet evaluates Milgram’s study by looking at its experimental method, the use
of ethical procedures and other lines of evaluation. It relates to the Curriculum Press Factsheet 05 ‘Obedience to authority’.

What did Milgram do?

Stanley Milgram is most famous for his obedience studies. These studies created much controversy as they showed that ‘ordinary’
people were so obedient to authority that they were willing to give electric shocks to a stranger. Some people would even give up to
450 volts!
The Factsheet ‘Obedience to authority’ describes in detail what Milgram did in his study. In this Factsheet, we will focus on the
strengths and weaknesses of Milgram’s study.

How do you evaluate Milgrams’ study?

‘ Evaluating’ means to talk about the strengths and weaknesses of research. So, we will consider both the pluses and minuses of
Milgram’s study.

Milgram’s study is famous as it is criticised for:

• its experimental method
• its use of ethics.
We will look at these points in turn below. We will then look at how we can evaluate Milgram’s study in other ways.

A. Experimental method
This looks at the design of the experiment and how it was conducted. Milgram’s study is mostly criticised for its experimental validity
and its ecological validity.
1. Experimental validity 2. Ecological validity
What is experimental validity? What is ecological validity?
• When psychologists talk about ‘experimental validity’ they • When psychologists talk about ‘ecological validity’ they are
are asking whether the experiment does actually measure what asking how much the findings apply to a real-life setting and
it intends to measure. It is also known as internal validity. other situations. It is also known as external validity.
• If Milgram’s study has experimental validity, the participants • Milgram did his original study in a laboratory setting. It is
should behave as they would normally do in that situation. questioned whether the findings can be generalised to real-life
So the experiment should really measure obedience in general. settings.
What evidence is there for experimental validity in Milgram’s What evidence is there for ecological validity in Milgram’s
study? study?
! The participants must have believed the task as they were ! Milgram (1974) did do variations of the study in other settings
willing to be given strong shocks (Turner and Solomon, 1962). (e.g., in a run-down office building instead of at Yale University).
! Rosenhan (1969) found that almost 70% of participants did ! Participants did think that the experiment was real, so we can
believe the set-up. argue that it is ecologically valid.
" Orme and Holland (1968) claimed that Milgram’s study lacked ! It is ecologically valid as cross-cultural studies produce the
experimental validity. They proposed that Milgram found out same findings. Smith and Bond (1993) collected findings from
more about how willing the participants were to obey the other countries and found the same results. In fact, some
experimenter than about obedience in general. See text box countries produced even higher levels of obedience. For
below. example, in Spain 80% of participants gave the maximum shock.
! Milgram said that the experiments do follow similar rules to
social situations and so are true to life. ! The findings have been replicated in more natural settings.
For example, Bickman (1974) tested obedience on the streets
" The participants were paid for taking part. Some critics say of New York. Hofling and colleagues (1966) tested obedience
that payment for participation means that the participants are in a hospital setting. Meeus and Raaijmakers (1995) examined
entering a ‘contract’. So Milgram’s findings are evidence of obedience in a job interview setting (see Curriculum Press
obedience in a contract rather than of obedience in general. Factsheet 05 ‘Obedience to authority’ for a description of
! However, Milgram did inform the participants that they could Hofling et al. (1966) and Meeus and Raaijmakers (1995)).
leave and would still be paid anyway.
Imagine that you are in an unfamiliar situation; you would watch the people around you for clues on how you should behave.
Orme and Holland (1968) suggest that this happens in Milgram’s study, with the participants looking for cues about how they
should behave. The participants may look for cues given out by the experimenter. So, it is possible that participants obeyed the
experimenter because they felt that that was how they were expected to behave.

1

21 Evaluating Milgram (1963)
B. Ethical issues
What are ethics guidelines?
• The British Psychological Society sets out guidelines on how
to do experiments in an ethical way. These guidelines make
sure that no experiment causes harm to anyone, either
physically or mentally. Experimenters follow these guidelines
as closely as possible. The ethical issues include; avoiding
deception, debriefing, getting consent, the right to withdraw
from the experiment and so on.
• Critics claim that Milgram broke ethical guidelines in four areas;
(1) distress
(2) deception
(3) lack of informed consent
(4) the right to withdraw.
We will look at each of these in turn.
1. Distress
Ethical guidelines state that participants must not be distressed
in any way by the experimental procedure.
• Baumrind (1964) said that Milgram caused severe distress in
his participants.
• Milgram said that he had not anticipated there being any
distress before beginning the experiments.
• Milgram followed-up the participants one year after the study.
They did not appear to have suffered any harm or distress.
84% said that they were glad to have participated, 15% were
neutral whereas only 1.3% were sorry that they had
participated. Furthermore, when psychiatrists interviewed 40
participants one year after the study, they found that the study
has caused no harm.
2. Deception
Ethical guidelines state that experimenters should avoid deception
unless there is extremely strong scientific justification for deceiving
participants.
• Milgram did not tell the participants the true purpose of their
role in the study; they thought that the shocks were real.
• Milgram stated that the deception was necessary otherwise
the task would not seem real to the participants. Not seeming
real would affect the end results.
3. Lack of informed consent
ë Ethical guidelines state that participants agree (consent) to take
part themselves and that they know what is going to happen
during the experiment.
In Milgram’s study, it is not possible to get informed consent
because the participants do not have full knowledge about what
is going to happen. This is because the study involves deception.
However, Milgram did get ‘presumptive consent’. Presumptive
consent means asking people beforehand if they think that a study
would be acceptable to do. Milgram consulted psychiatrists and
his students.
4. Right to withdraw
ë Ethical guidelines state that participants have the freedom to
leave or stop the experiment at any time.
• Coolican (1990) said that Milgram did not tell participants that
they had the right to stop. He supports this by using the fact
that the experimenter ordered participants to continue (e.g.,
“It is absolutely essential that you continue”).
• However, Milgram said that he did inform participants that
they could leave and that they would get their money
regardless.
2
PMT
Psychology Factsheet
C. How else can we evaluate Milgram?
• Milgram did follow other ethical procedures. For example,
he did debrief his participants and assured them that their
behaviour was normal. Debriefing is when the experimenter
explains the purpose of the experiment to the participant at
the end.
• There was much care in the follow-up study to assess the
participants’ response to being in the experiment.
• Milgram was ahead of his time in using ethical scrutiny. He
pioneered ethical committees which are now taken for
granted (Blass, 2004).
• His findings did contribute to current thinking about
obedience at the time. Also, they have had great impact on
experimental research and theory since.
• The majority of obedience studies since Milgram involve
some form of breaking the ethical guidelines (e.g., using
deception).
• The findings of this study were not what were expected.
Before he began the study, Milgram asked his psychology
students to predict how many people would give the
maximum shock of 450 volts. They predicted that only 3%
of participants would give the maximum shock, in fact 65%
did!
• Aronson (1988) claims that there would be no ethical
objections if the findings were more acceptable.
• Baumrind (1964) suggested that the general population
reacted strongly to Milgram’s findings as they did not want
to accept the implications that ‘ordinary’ people could be
so obedient to harm others. So they responded by shifting
attention from the results to attacking the ethics used
instead.
• The US army takes this issue seriously and uses it in two
compulsory psychology courses for its Military Academy
(Blass, 2004).
• Obedience is still a relevant topic today. Consider the recent
case of the American soldiers who tortured Iraqi prisoners
(in 2004) and claimed that they were ‘just following orders’.
Exam Hints and Questions:
• An exam question is likely to ask you to evaluate Milgram’s
obedience study. Exam questions can also ask you to
describe how psychologists deal with ethical issues in
research or whether the findings justify the methods used
to find them.
• Do not just criticise Milgram. Present a balanced view by
also writing about his study’s strengths.
• If the exam question says “consider” then you must use
arguments from both sides of debate (for and against).
Acknowledgements: This Psychology Factsheet was researched and written by Amanda
Albon.
The Curriculum Press, Bank House, 105 King Street, Wellington, Shropshire, TF1 1NU.
Psychology Factsheets may be copied free of charge by teaching staff or students, provided
that their school is a registered subscriber. No part of these Factsheets may be reproduced,
stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any other form or by any other means, without
the prior permission of the publisher. ISSN 1351-5136
 PMT

21. Evaluating Milgram (1963) Psychology Factsheet

Worksheet: Evaluating Milgram(1963)

Name

1. Complete the following sentences:

• Milgram examined ______________ to authority in the year ______.

• Milgram’s study is criticised for its ______________________________ and its use of ____________________.

2. Milgram’s study is criticised for which two aspects of its method?

......................................................................................................................................................................................................................

......................................................................................................................................................................................................................

......................................................................................................................................................................................................................
3. Give one criticism of its experimental validity.

......................................................................................................................................................................................................................

......................................................................................................................................................................................................................
4. Give one line of support for its experimental validity.

......................................................................................................................................................................................................................

......................................................................................................................................................................................................................
5. How might paying the participants for taking part affect Milgram’s results?

......................................................................................................................................................................................................................

......................................................................................................................................................................................................................

......................................................................................................................................................................................................................
6. Complete the table:

Researchers What they did What they found

Smith and Bond (1993) Collected cross-cultural evidence

Bickman (1974) Level of obedience varied with perceived authority

Examined obedience in a job interview situation

7. Which ethical procedures were said to have been broken in Milgram’s study?

......................................................................................................................................................................................................................

......................................................................................................................................................................................................................

......................................................................................................................................................................................................................
8. How could the general population’s reaction to Milgram’s findings affect how it is evaluated?

......................................................................................................................................................................................................................

......................................................................................................................................................................................................................

......................................................................................................................................................................................................................