Analysing Milgram's Experiment

Psychology: AQA A Level, topic 1.1.8

Analysis of Milgram's Experiment

Milgram's (1963) experiment showed that ordinary people are obedient to authority. There were pros and cons to the experiment.

Strict control of variables - variables could be controlled because the experiment was done in a laboratory. We should be able to establish cause and effect.

Low ecological validity - participants were in an artificial situation (they wouldn't naturally be in a situation of shocking people). This means the study has low ecological validity (can't be generalised easily).
Deception - participants weren't able to give informed consent because they didn't know the real nature of the experiment. They weren't told they could withdraw.
Lack of protection - participants were visibly stressed during the study.
In Milgram's defence, no formal ethical guidelines existed at the time.

(Potential) low internal validity - Internal validity is a measure of how valid results are. It's a measure of whether results are just affected by changes in the independent variable in a cause-and-effect relationship or other variables too. Participants might have known they weren't actually inflicting real shocks and just gone along with what the experimenter wanted.
Milgram backed up his results by saying that participants' displays of stress showed that they thought the experiment was genuine.