WebHofling (1966) dig a little deeper into Milgram’s studies by conducting a study of obedience in a natural setting. Their participants were 22 nurses who were unaware that a study was taking place. The nurses receive a call whilst they were working under a Dr.Smith. Who instructed them to give 20mg of Astrofen to a patient on the ward. WebJan 15, 2024 · In 1966, Charles K. Hofling performed an experiment of obedience to authority focused on nurses who were not aware that they were involved in the test. This …
Controversial and Unethical Psychology Experiments - Verywell Mind
http://psychlotron.org.uk/resources/social/AS_AQA_socinf_obagencyevidencediscuss.pdf WebOct 8, 2024 · What was the purpose of the Hofling nurse study? The Hofling Nurse study (also known as the Hofling Hospital study) is one of the many experiments meant to replicate the Milgram study, but without the potentially traumatic results for the participants. Psychiatrist Charles K. Hofling created the study in 1966. pitalua
1.5: Charles Hofling et al. (1966) Flashcards Preview - Brainscape
WebIn contrast, Hofling et al.'s study found that a higher proportion of nurses (21 out of 22) were willing to administer medication without proper authorization, indicating a higher level of obedience. Role of proximity: Another difference is the role of proximity. Milgram's study showed that physical proximity between the participant and the ... WebDec 6, 2024 · Aim Charles K. Hofling (1966) created a more realistic study of obedience than Milgram’s by carrying out field studies on nurses who were unaware that they were involved in an experiment. Method The procedure involved a field experiment involving 22 (real) night nurses. Dr. Smith (the researcher) phones the nurses at a psychiatric hospital (on […] WebOct 30, 2011 · Firstly, when the Hofling study was replicated with a known medicine, the nurses did not over-prescribe the tablets. This shows that previous results were due more to ignorance than blind obedience. If this is the case, then the Hofling study cannot support ecological validity as its own internal validity is seriously flawed. ban0012345