Administrative Obedience - Meeus & Raaijmakers, 1985

Aim
1. Carried out in the Netherlands, 20 years after Milgrims study
  1. More liberal culture
2. Test obedience where harm could be done, but with violence typical of our time - less physical, more psychological
Procedure
1. Based on Milgrim
  1. Researcher orders naive participant to do something harmful to another person
2. Ordered to harass a job applicant, in order to make him nervous while he was sitting a test to determine whether he would get the job
3. Told that this was in the context of a research project
Results
1. 92% of participants obeyed and disturbed and criticised the applicant when told to do so by the researcher
  1. They thought it was unfair and didn't want to do it, but still did
2. Variations
  1. Removing researcher
    1. Obedience dropped
  2. Introducing 2 rebellious peers for participant
    1. Obedience dropped
Conclusion
1. Even in a more liberal culture, people obeyed an authority figure and went against their better nature to do something designed to harm another person
Evaluation
1. Validity
  1. Ecological
    1. Yes, as this kind of psychological violence is more in tune with the time than physical violence
    2. No, as still unlikely scenario
  2. Population
    1. Dutch adults from general population, is representative
    2. Results consistent with other tests in Europe
  3. Results support Milgrims findings, suggesting it is a genuine effect of recognising authority

Resource summary

	Created by Beth Ritchie over 10 years ago