Checking your understanding of reliability Milgram (1963) was interested in investigating whether ordinary people will obey a legitimate authority figure even when required to injure an innocent person. 40 male participants aged 20-50 from New Haven in the USA took part in this study who were a volunteer sample, there was also a were allocated a role of a teacher or learner (which was fixed) and took ‘confederate’. Participants part in a word pair recall task. The confederate was always given the role of the in each ‘learner’ trial and always acted exactly the same for each participant. The participant was always allocated the The teacher was told to administer an electric shock to the learner every time he ‘teacher’ role. got a question wrong on the tasks (the electric shock was fake but participants know this!). didn’t The learner mainly gave wrong answers, he would always give 3 wrong answers and then 1 right answer to each participant and then he received his fake shocks after a wrong answer. Participants were observed through a one-way mirror by multiple observers and the sessions were also filmed. Even when the learner seemed in apparent pain (always banging on a wall at 300 Volts) the experimenter told the participant (teacher) to continue. In total 65% of participants continued to deliver a deadly 450 volt shock, all participants went to 300 volts. Milgram conducted his research in other countries and found a similar level of obedience in those too, for example UK 58% and Australia 68% obedience. Is this study Internally Does this study have What can we conclude reliable? external reliability? about inter-rater reliability in this study? Explain why or why not with Explain why or why not with clear examples from the clear examples from the scenario above scenario above
Checking your understanding of reliability Milgram (1963) was interested in investigating whether ordinary people will obey a legitimate authority figure even when required to injure an innocent person. 40 male participants aged 20-50 from New Haven in the USA took part in this study who were a volunteer sample, there was also a ‘confederate’. Participants were allocated a role of a teacher or learner (which was fixed) and took part in a word pair recall task. The confederate was always given the role of the ‘learner’ in each trial and always acted exactly the same for each participant. The participant was always allocated the ‘teacher’ role. The teacher was told to administer an electric shock to the learner every time he got a question wrong on the tasks (the electric shock was fake but participants didn’t know this!). The learner mainly gave wrong answers, he would always give 3 wrong answers and then 1 right answer to each participant and then he received his fake shocks after a wrong answer. Participants were observed through a one-way mirror by multiple observers and the sessions were also filmed. Even when the learner seemed in apparent pain (always banging on a wall at 300 Volts) the experimenter told the participant (teacher) to continue. In total 65% of participants continued to deliver a deadly 450 volt shock, all participants went to 300 volts. Milgram conducted his research in other countries and found a similar level of obedience in those too, for example UK 58% and Australia 68% obedience. Is this study Internally reliable? Explain why or why not with clear examples from the scenario above Does this study have external reliability? Explain why or why not with clear examples from the scenario above What can we conclude about inter-rater reliability in this study?
123-371130-lr29-reliability-validity-activity-v2.docx