Explanations for obedience Flashcards
Agentic state:
-when perceive someone to be higher up social hierarchy there is an agentic shift into the agentic state
-act as agent for authority figure
-blindly follow orders without belief of responsibility for own actions (give up free will)
Legitimacy of authority:
Autonomous state: explanantion
-independent with free will over actions
-occurs when not in presence of an authority figure
Agentic state: evaluation: strength
Milgram (1974) variation of procedure, confederate reseracher gave orders on a telephone link
-obedience declined by 42%
-suggests participants were in autonomous state and saw themselves as responsible for their actions
Legitimacy of authority figure: explanation
-Obedient individuals accept power and status of authority figures to give orders -> seen as being in charge
-more likely to obey those in a higher position or status in the social hierarchy
-if authority believed as legitimate - agentic state
Legitimacy of authority figure: support
Milgram (1963) reported that some participants in his study ignored the learners’ apparent distress - focused on following procedure -> could be recognising legitimate authority of researcher and therefore acting in an autonomous state
Milgram experiment: aims + procedure
how far people would go in obeying an instruction if it involved harming other people, conflict between authority and conscience.
- 40 male participants aged between 20 and 50 years area around New Haven
-paid $4.50 for participation
-took place in lab at Yale Uni
-each paired with a confederate, assigning role of ‘‘teacher or ‘learner’ in rigged draw (participant always teacher)
-instructed to administer an electric shock every time the learner made a mistake + increase the voltage after each mistake.(not real but participants thought real)
-watched the learner being strapped to the electric chair and was given a sample electric shock to convince them that the procedure was real.
-180 volts= learner complained of a weak heart.
At 300 volts =he banged on the wall and demanded to leave
315 volts = he became silent, to give the illusions that was unconscious, or even dead.
-verbal prods from confederate experimenter “The experiment requires that you continue” if teacher tried to stop
-observed by Milgram through one way mirror
Milgram experiment: findings+conclusion
Milgram found that all of the real participants went to at least 300 volts and 65% continued until the full 450 volts. Participants often showed signs of extreme tension (sweating,trembling, seizures of nervous laughter)
He concluded that under the right circumstances ordinary people will obey unjust orders, despite experiencing high levels of stress.
Milgram experiment: evaluation: Strength 1
APPLICABLE TO REAL LIFE SITUATIONS such as in WW2 to explain the behaviours of the soldiers obeying authority figures killing people despite facing extreme psychological harm e.g shellshock PTSD
Milgram experiment: evaluation: Strength 2
WELL STANDARDISED the terms of experiment such as obedience was accurately operationalised as the amount of voltage given for example, so study was experimentally valid
Milgram experiment: evaluation: Limitation 1
UNETHICAL:
Protection from psychological harm - extreme physical reactions of participants (trembling,sweating, even seizures)..however only 2% had regrets about involvement with through debreif post experiment, no long term damage 1 year post (cost-benefit)
Deception/informed consent- participants deceived as said study concerned with memory not obedience ..however participants were still debriefed and deception was necessary for them to believe shocks were real
Right to withdraw- no explicit right to withdraw given, attempts met with verbal prods to continue. however…Milgram argued they did as 35% refused to continue and left
Inducement to take part -paid $4.50 advertised, participants may only have continued in order to be paid..however was not claimed by any participants HOWVER it could be argued that these were positive as they led to the formation of psychological ethical codes and guidelines
Milgram experiment: evaluation: Limitation 2
METHODOLOGICAL CRITICISMS such as lacking ecological validity; as took place in artificial lab setting, androcentrism: all test subjects male and within age group of 20-50, cannot be applied to whole population
The external explananation for obedience: Proximity
-smaller distance between teacher and learner, less obedience as belief of more culpability
-e.g in Milgram study (1974) when teacher and learner in same room, so teacher can see learners’ distress
-obedience declines from 62.5 % to 40 %
-when teacher had to force learners’ hand on apparent shock plate, obedience fell to 30%
The external explananation for obedience: Location
-affects amount of percieved legitimate authority person giving orders holds, increased authority leads to increased obedience
-e.g Milgram study (1974) alternatively performs study in an office block in a run down part of town instead of at Yale Uni, obedience dropped from 62.5 to 40 %
The external explananation for obedience: Uniform
- uniforms give perception of added legitimacy to authority figures, increasing obedience rates
-Milgram’s experiment featured a confederate researcher wearing lab coat
Howver.. Bickman(1974) found when ordering people on NY street to pick up rubbish, or loan coin to stranger - 19% would obey his research asssitsnat when he was dressed in civilian clothes, 14% as a milkman, 38% in security guard’s uniform.
