Similarities and Differences between Milgram's Obedience Studies and Burger's Replication Study

This essay outlines the similarities and differences between Milgram's obedience studies and Burger's replication study, including research aims, methods, findings, and contributions to our understanding.

Outline the similarities and
differences between Milgrams
obedience studies and Burgers
replication study

Table of Contents
INTRODUCTION ..........................................................................................................................3
MAIN BODY...................................................................................................................................3
CONCLUSION ...............................................................................................................................5
REFERENCES................................................................................................................................6

INTRODUCTION
Psychology is the scientific study of mind and behavior which helps in denoting the
aspects of how the analysis can be done for the research. The similarities and differences
between Miligram's obedience study and Burger replication study will be evaluated which will
help in knowing how the tests and experiments has been undertaken. Thus, the essay will outline
the similarities and differences between Miligram's obedience studies and Burger replication
study.
MAIN BODY
Differences and Similarities between Miligram's obedience studies and Burgers replication
study
Research aims of Miligram obedience study as compared to Burgers replication study are -
 Describing the research of Stanley Miligram on obedience were done whereas, in burgers
replication study sampling and generalization was done in concern with psychology.
 Outlining the ethical challenges psychologists encounter when studying human behavior
whereas recognizing different features of methods in psychology report was done in
Burgers replication study.
 Relative importance of situational influences on human behavior understanding
importance of replication in psychological research was done in Burgers replication
study. Appreciating Miligram's studies for the debate on the phenomenon of obedience and
social behavior whereas appreciating the contribution of method and findings of the
studies in Burgers replication study was done (Mocanu and et.al., 2020).
Who and what was studied
Miligram's obedience study was observed and analyzed in comparison to Burgers
replication study. It is studied from the experiment that defined social psychology and the main
reason for this study was that Miligram wanted to explore the main reason for the people doing
evil things. And for this, Miligram devised an experiment which placed people in moral dilemma

as they had to choose between what they were told and doing the right thing. The study which
Miligram described was, that there are two roles which are described in the experimented which
are the role of the teacher and a learner. The learner and teacher will be in different rooms and
will communicate through the microphones. The study is designed to investigate the effect of
punishment on learning. The teacher is asked to administer electric shock to the learner every
time when they respond to the memory task by responding incorrectly (Perry and et.al., 2020).
Shocks are given to the learner if they respond incorrectly. Therefore, the first shock is of 45
volts. The experimenter is taken to the adjacent room and makes sit down for responding to the
answers when asked. There are different phases in the experiment which are taken into concern.
The study was conducted at large scale which helped in knowing the aspects as to how the
changes are taking place within the research. The result included 40 participants as male
members. In comparison to Miligram's obedience study, Burgers replication study has been
described as -
Replication is when the study is repeated to ascertain whether same results are obtained
using different samples and in different historical and social context. Miligram's research was
replicated or repeated in various countries which helped in observing that the scale of study of
obedience was analyzed through the level which was framed. Miligram's results and findings
were replicated and helped in knowing that how the experiment or research was being
undertaken (Gibson and et.al., 2018). Burger was engaged and interested in finding out that the
high rates of obedience which are likely to be found. Burger was observing the aspects as to how
the expansion can be made in the Miligram Study. Burger used the sample of participants which
were both male and female. This allowed Burger to explore the gender differences in obedience.
What methods did the researcher use and how did they carry out their research
Qualitative and quantitative methods were used within the experiment which created
differences in the study and which demonstrated the importance of how the Burger's and
Miligram's research is being undertaken. The research was being carried out in the most effective
and proper manner as both Miligram and Burger followed the similar methods within the
experiment which has been carried out effectively for the research.
Findings of the two studies -

It has been found that Burger successfully replicated Miligram's findings in which the
rate of obedience were very similar as that which were reported by Miligram. Burger found that
there was no difference in the levels of obedience which was through the base condition and the
modeled refusal condition. There was no difference in the gender which was observed between
male and female (Burger and et.al., 2018). The participants same up with more concerns with the
orders which they have to follow up and which they obeyed within the experiment to be
conducted successfully. Situational factors are more important than personality in both the
Burger and Miligram's study of experiments. There was no straightforward link between desire
to be in control and the obedience aspects which was described in Miligram's experiment or
study. There are differences in the two conditions of work which were observed in the two
methods of work in Miligram's experiment which were basic condition and modeled refusal
condition. Burger study was different with Miligram's research which was modified for the
reasons of ethics.
How have the studies contributed to our understanding
The studies have contributed to our understanding that the Miligram's research did not
capture the complexity of human interaction which occurred during course of both the
experiments (Raso and et.al., 2020). The two methods which are qualitative and quantitative
research methods helped in exploring different questions but helped in analyzing each other by
illuminating complex psychological phenomena. This has helped in knowing that Burger's
replication study helped in denoting the effects which Miligram obedience study denoted and
explained at large scale.
CONCLUSION
Thus, the essay outlined the similarities and differences between Miligram's obedience
studies and Burger replication study. This essay also ensured that how the research aims differ
from each study conducted. What was studied was also known in the research. The methods
which were used by the researcher were quantitative and qualitative were also be described.
Findings of both the studies were also explained along with the contribution to our
understanding.

REFERENCES
Books and Journals
Burger, A.M. and et.al., 2018. Transcutaneous vagus nerve stimulation and extinction of
prepared fear: A conceptual non-replication. Scientific reports. 8(1). pp.1-11.
Gibson, S. and et.al., 2018. Just following orders? The rhetorical invocation of ‘obedience’in
Stanley Milgram's post‐experiment interviews. European Journal of Social Psychology.
48(5). pp.585-599.
Kusch, S. and et.al., 2019. Environmental impact judgments of meat, vegetarian, and insect
burgers: Unifying the negative footprint illusion and quantity insensitivity. Food quality
and preference. 78. p.103731.
Mocanu, L. and et.al., 2020. Obedience to Authority: Milgram Contributions. New Trends in
Psychology. 2(1).
Perry, G. and et.al., 2020. Credibility and incredulity in Milgram’s obedience experiments: A
reanalysis of an unpublished test. Social Psychology Quarterly. 83(1). pp.88-106.
Raso, M.C. and et.al., 2020. Interferon-stimulated gene 15 accelerates replication fork
progression inducing chromosomal breakage. Journal of Cell Biology. 219(8).
p.e202002175.