1.1.1 - theories of obedience (agency theory and social impact theory) Flashcards
what did Milgram use as a basis for his agency theory?
the conclusion from his experiments into obedience that everyone is capable of obeying the demands of an authority figure, even if it requires hurting another person
what observation did Milgram make about human society?
that it had a hierarchical structure, with many at the bottom and a few at the top, and obedience was necessary to maintain this
why did Milgram believe society was hierarchical in nature?
he believed it evolved for a survival function, and also to create social order and harmony within a group, hence the importance of obedience - without obedience, challenges to social order would cause chaos
what is socialisation?
the process by which we learn the rules and norms of society, through socialising agents like teachers and parents
how are people innately prepared to be obedient?
through the process of socialisation when exposed to authority figures in the family and education system - systems of reward and punishment to encourage obedience are used by parents as primary socialisers and also in educational and legal settings
what two states did Milgram propose people exist in?
autonomy and agency
what is an autonomous state?
when people act according to their own free will
what is an agentic state?
when people see themselves as acting as an agent for an authority figure (switch to this mindset when an authority figure gives an instruction)
what is agentic shift?
when people shift from an autonomous state to an agentic state in order to relieve moral strain
what is moral strain?
when people feel uncomfortable because they are asked to do something they see as immoral which they wouldn’t choose to do - may also feel anxious because they consider dissent, but this requires behaving against what they have been socialised to do
how is moral strain relieved?
- by shifting to an agentic state of mind, because the responsibility of the situation is displaced onto the authority figure, and individuals don’t have to blame themselves for the consequences of their actions
- by choosing dissent and removing yourself from the situation
how does Milgram’s baseline study provide supporting evidence for agency theory?
the experimenter (authority figure) caused participants to experience moral strain when they instructed them to shock the learner - the experimenter also said they would take responsibility for any consequences, so participants moved from the autonomous to the agentic state and 65% obeyed the order
how does Milgram’s baseline study provide contradictory evidence for agency theory?
many participants still showed signs of moral strain when they delivered the shock as they were very distressed, but if they’d moved to the agentic state this should have been relieved
35% of participants weren’t fully obedient, so they may not have entered the agentic state at all
how does Abu Ghraib Prison in Iraq provide supporting evidence for agency theory?
in the Iraq war from 2003-2004, US military personnel committed crimes of sexual and physical abuse, torture and murder against the prisoners
when asked why they behaved in that way, they said they simply following orders
how does Hofling et al. (1966) provide supporting evidence for agency theory?
21 out of 22 nurses went to give the medication to the patient, and many justified their actions as being due to the hierarchy of authority at the hospital, so they displaced their responsibility onto the doctor
weaknesses of agency theory - individual differences?
it doesn’t explain why some people obey and some don’t, because dissent occurs for many reasons - therefore obedience is more complex than agency theory suggests
weaknesses of agency theory - concept of agency?
agency is an internal mental process so it can’t be directly measured and is hard to define - it can only be inferred from human behaviour
weaknesses of agency theory - evolutionary basis of obedience?
there is no direct evidence that obedience evolved over time because we can’t go back in time and study its development and archaeological evidence doesn’t support it
counter argument - similar hierarchical systems exist in animal groups like primates, so we can infer it has evolved a a survival function
weaknesses of agency theory - motivational issues behind obedience?
it doesn’t explain these issues, while the five bases of power which influence behaviour - legitimate, reward, referent, expert and coercive power - created by French and Raven (1959) do
what did Bibb Latane (1981) propose in his theory of social influence?
other people can persuade, inhibit, threaten and support us - these effects are due to the actions of others (social impact) and change how we feel and act in response
what can social impact theory be used to do?
explain why people are obedient
what is the target of social influence?
the person who is being impacted on
what is the source of social influence?
the person who is influencing the target
what are the three principles which result in more or less social influence being exerted on the target?
- strength (of source) - determined by status, authority or age
- immediacy - determined by distance between source and target or presence of buffers which may be barriers to distance
- number - how many sources and targets are in social situation
how do the principles which impact social influence relate to obedience?
authority figures who are perceived as legitimate, immediate to the individual and greater in number are more likely to ensure obedience
what does multiplication of impact mean?
as the strength, immediacy and number of the source increases, the social impact on the target increases, so they are more likely to obey
what is the law of diminishing returns?
increasing the strength, immediacy and number of the source only has an effect up to a point - it has the biggest effect at first until the source number reaches three (target increasingly likely to be obedient) but after this increasing the factors has less impact (no difference in likelihood of obedience)
what evidence shows the reduction in social impact?
Berkowitz, Bickman and Milgram (1969) carried out a study at the City University of New York
1-15 confederates collected on the street and craned their necks to look up at the sixth floor of a university building
Milgram was in a window in the building recording the confederates and passers by that looked up
increasing the number of confederates increased the number of passers by that imitated their actions, but the number of passers by became smaller relative to the size of the confederate group (so the multiplicative effect levelled off)
what does division of impact mean?
the number of targets to be influenced affects the impact of the source - more targets than source means less social impact as it is divided between targets
how does division of impact relate to obedience?
an authority figure would have less capacity to influence someone and make them obey if they had an ally/allies
what evidence shows division of impact?
Latane and Darley (1970) demonstrated it in studies on bystander behaviour - a lone person was more likely to help someone in need than a group of people (where there was diffusion of responsibility)
in Milgram’s rebel peers variation where two peers rebelled before the participant, obedience fell to 10%
strengths of social impact theory - predicting behaviour?
it can predict behaviour under certain conditions, because it explains under what conditions people are likely to be influenced, but not why (so it is descriptive not explanatory)
strengths of social impact theory - quantifiable?
the principles of the theory can be observed in everyday behaviour, making it quantifiable eg. Milgram’s variation 7 (changing proximity)
weaknesses of social impact theory - static rather than dynamic theory?
the theory implies that individuals are passive receivers of the behaviour of others towards them, however social interaction is an active process and the target also contributes to the social situation (so doesn’t take into account how target and source interact)
weaknesses of social impact theory - individual differences?
ignores individual differences, because some people are more resistance to social impact and others more passive
weaknesses of social impact theory - types of social situation?
doesn’t explain some types of social situation eg. can’t predict impact of two equal groups on each other where there would be no clear target/source
weaknesses of social impact theory - deterministic?
theory is deterministic because it suggests multiplication of impact, but this ignores that some people won’t obey due to free will/individual differences
by failing to account for these things, social impact theory diffuses responsibility for our actions meaning people may not be blamed/punished for their actions (as source would be blamed)
social impact theory - supporting evidence?
Milgram’s variation 7 - shows that when immediacy of source decreases, obedience of target decreases
social impact theory - contradictory evidence?
Hofling et al. - shows that even when immediacy of source decreases, obedience of targets still remains high
