What do Milgram (1963) and Kohlberg (1968) reveal about obedience and moral development?
Core research for Unit 2: Milgram (1963) on obedience to authority and Kohlberg (1968) on the stages of moral development, including procedure, findings, conclusions and evaluation.
A focused answer to the WJEC A-Level Psychology Unit 2 core research: Milgram (1963) on obedience to authority and Kohlberg (1968) on moral development, covering procedure, findings, conclusions and evaluation of each study.
Reviewed by: AI editorial process; not yet individually human-reviewed
Have a quick question? Jump to the Q&A page
Jump to a section
What this dot point is asking
Unit 2 names two pieces of core research that you must be able to describe and evaluate: Milgram (1963) on obedience to authority and Kohlberg (1968) on the stages of moral development. For each you should know the procedure, the findings, the conclusion and an evaluation, and you should be able to apply them to questions about social influence and moral reasoning.
Milgram (1963): obedience to authority
Conclusion. Ordinary people will obey a legitimate authority figure even when ordered to harm an innocent person, so destructive obedience reflects the situation more than the disposition of the individual.
Evaluation. Strengths: it was highly controlled and standardised (the prods, the voltage steps), making it replicable, and it had real-world relevance to understanding atrocities. Weaknesses: serious ethical problems (deception, lack of fully informed consent, psychological harm and difficulty withdrawing), and questions over ecological validity and whether participants really believed the shocks were real. It also used only men, limiting generalisation.
Kohlberg (1968): stages of moral development
Conclusion. Moral reasoning develops in a fixed, invariant sequence with age, although most people do not reach the highest post-conventional stages.
Evaluation. Strengths: it gave an influential, structured account of moral development and used a clear interview method that could be repeated. Weaknesses: the sample was only male, raising the charge of androcentric (gender) bias (Gilligan argued it neglected a female "ethic of care"); it may show cultural bias towards Western individualist morality; and it assesses moral reasoning, not behaviour, so high reasoning does not guarantee moral action.
Why these studies sit in Unit 2
These two studies model the kinds of social and developmental research the unit draws on, and they supply evidence and examples for the contemporary debates (for example obedience in real atrocities, or the ethics of studying obedience) and for the research-methods content (Milgram's controlled procedure; Kohlberg's interview and longitudinal design).
Examples in context
Example 1. Obedience in the real world. Milgram's finding helps explain how ordinary people can carry out orders that cause harm, from wartime atrocities to following harmful workplace instructions, illustrating situational pressure over disposition.
Example 2. The Heinz dilemma in class. Two students may both say Heinz should steal the drug but for different reasons, one to avoid the guilt of letting his wife die (post-conventional), another because he would be blamed if she died (pre-conventional). This shows Kohlberg's focus on reasoning, not the verdict.
Try this
Q1. What percentage of Milgram's (1963) participants administered the maximum 450-volt shock? [1 mark]
- Cue. 65 percent (26 of 40).
Q2. Name Kohlberg's three levels of moral development. [3 marks]
- Cue. Pre-conventional, conventional and post-conventional.
Q3. Explain one ethical criticism of Milgram (1963) and one bias criticism of Kohlberg (1968). [4 marks]
- Cue. Milgram: deception and psychological harm with limited right to withdraw. Kohlberg: androcentric, males-only sample, so possibly gender-biased and not generalisable.
Exam-style practice questions
Practice questions written in the style of WJEC exam questions on this dot point, with worked answer explainers. The year tag is the paper they imitate, not the source.
WJEC specimen8 marksDescribe the procedure and findings of Milgram's (1963) study of obedience.Show worked answer →
WJEC rewards an accurate, organised description of method and results.
Procedure: 40 American men were told they were in a study of learning and memory. A rigged draw made the participant the "teacher" and a confederate the "learner". The teacher gave the learner electric shocks, rising in 15-volt steps from 15 to 450 volts, for each wrong answer. The shocks were not real, but the teacher believed they were. An experimenter in a lab coat gave standard "prods" to continue.
Findings: every participant went to at least 300 volts, and 65 percent (26 of 40) continued to the maximum 450 volts. Many showed extreme distress (sweating, trembling, nervous laughter) but still obeyed.
Conclusion: ordinary people will obey an authority figure even when ordered to harm another person. Markers reward accurate figures (40 men, 15-450 volts, 65 percent).
WJEC specimen8 marksDescribe Kohlberg's (1968) theory of moral development.Show worked answer →
WJEC rewards a clear description of the levels and stages with the method.
Method: Kohlberg interviewed boys aged 10 to 16 using moral dilemmas, most famously the Heinz dilemma (should a man steal a drug to save his dying wife?), and analysed the reasoning behind their answers, not whether they said yes or no.
Theory: moral reasoning develops through three levels, each with two stages. Pre-conventional (stage 1 obedience and punishment; stage 2 self-interest), conventional (stage 3 good-boy/good-girl; stage 4 law and order), and post-conventional (stage 5 social contract; stage 6 universal ethical principles).
Conclusion: moral reasoning develops in a fixed sequence with age, though few reach the highest stages. Markers reward the three levels, the six stages and the dilemma method.
Related dot points
- Research methods (Section B): hypotheses, variables, experimental and non-experimental methods, experimental designs, sampling, reliability, validity, and ethics.
A focused answer to WJEC A-Level Psychology Unit 2 Section B on research methods: hypotheses, variables, experimental and non-experimental methods, experimental designs, sampling techniques, reliability, validity and ethics.
- Contemporary debates (Section A): applying the five approaches to a current debate such as the ethics of neuroscience, the importance of mothering, conditioning children, the reliability of eyewitness testimony, and the value of positive psychology.
A focused answer to WJEC A-Level Psychology Unit 2 Section A on contemporary debates: how the five approaches inform current debates such as the ethics of neuroscience, the importance of mothering, conditioning children, eyewitness reliability and the value of positive psychology, and how to argue both sides.
- Criminal behaviours (Section A): biological, individual and social explanations of criminality, and one intervention used to reduce reoffending.
A focused answer to WJEC A-Level Psychology Unit 3 on criminal behaviours: biological, individual and social explanations of criminality, and one intervention used to reduce reoffending.
- The behaviourist approach: assumptions, application to the formation of relationships, the therapy of systematic desensitisation, the classic study of Watson and Rayner (1920), and evaluation.
A focused answer to WJEC A-Level Psychology Unit 1 on the behaviourist approach: its assumptions, its application to the formation of relationships, systematic desensitisation, the classic study of Watson and Rayner (1920), and how to evaluate the approach.
- Controversies (Section B): cultural bias, research ethics, the use of non-human animals, psychology as a science, and sexism in psychology.
A focused answer to WJEC A-Level Psychology Unit 3 Section B on controversies: cultural bias, research ethics, the use of non-human animals, whether psychology is a science, and sexism, and how to argue each.
Sources & how we know this
- WJEC GCE Psychology specification (from 2015) — WJEC (2015)