Karen Bullen
R2208481
DE 100 Investigating Psychology 1
TMA02
Outline the similarities and differences between Milgrams (1963) obedience study and Burgers (2009) replication.

This essay will look at an important key psychological experiment carried out by the renowned social psychologist Stanley Milgram which was carried out in the early 1960’s (Banyard 2012) to determine how far ordinary people would go to inflict pain to a fellow human based on instruction from an authority figure, and that of the replication of the experiment which was carried out by Burger in 2009 (Byford 2014) to determine if the same level of obedience was still applicable in the 21st Century, as was observed in the original study some 40 years earlier. The …show more content…

The questions given to the learner where the same as the original experiment. When the learner gave an incorrect answer the teacher advised them that they would be administered an electric shock. As the shocks increased in intensity the learner starts to protest first by grunting then at 120 volts shouts that they are in pain at 150 volts they ask to be released. It was at this point the participants started to feel uncomfortable in carrying on administering the shocks to the learner, and looked towards the experimenter for guidance. In both experiments the experimenter used prompts such as ‘please carry on’ ‘It is absolutely essential that you continue’ and ‘you have no choice you must go on’. In Milgram’s study the participants were encouraged to go all the way administering shocks up to the maximum 450 volts. Many of the’ teachers’ where observed to display signs of nervousness and tension and in the case of Milgram’s study three of the participates where observed to have experienced ‘full blown ‘uncontrollable seizures Milgram(1963,p.375) cited by Baynard (2014), and one participant had a seizure so ‘violently convulsive’ the experiment had to be halted. Milgram’s study caused an uproar in the world of psychology as it was so stressful to the participants and was not deemed to be ethical.