factors affecting obedience and dissent/resistance to obedience: situational factors

Question 1

what did Milgram’s exps demonstrate?

Answer 1

• that ordinary person could be capable of harm at instructions of authority figure
• dispelled myth that German soldiers were lacking in character trait, making them more compliant and obedient
• baseline obedience level of 65% was found in exp 1 and 5
• series of exps also demonstrated various situational factors increased or decreased levels of obedience and dissent

Question 2

what are the situational factors?

Answer 2

• momentum of compliance
• proximity
• status of authority
• personal responsibility

Question 3

momentum of compliance

Answer 3

• teacher has committed themselves to exp
• as request increased, ppts felt duty bound to continue
• also true of the shock generator as initial shocks were small but increased slowly in 15v increments
• situation created binding relationship that escalated steadily

Question 4

proximity

Answer 4

• the closer the authority figure, the higher the level of obedience
• distance seemed to act as buffer to obedience, found in telephonic instruction condition
• proximity of victim also acted as buffer
• when learner was in same room or teacher had to physically place hand of learner onto shock plate, obedience dropped
• in contrast to pilot study where learner was in different room and couldn’t be seen or heard
• resulted in 100% obedience
• Milgram referred to shock generator as physical buffer between ppt and victim in the same way that soldier would be more inclined to droop bomb than stab enemy, generator buffered distance between them

Question 5

status of authority

Answer 5

• Milgram stated obedience could only be established when authority figure was perceived to be legitimate
• found to be the case when exps were conducted at Yale University, and obedience fell when exo was moved to Bridgeport or conducted by ordinary man

Question 6

personal responsibility

Answer 6

• Milgram believed ppts would be more obedient in situation where personal responsibility is removed and placed on shoulders of authority figure
• in variation study where ppts has to sign contract that stated they were taking part of their own free will and relinquishing any legal responsibility from Yale, obedience fell to 40%

Question 7

strengths of situational factors affecting obedience and dissent?

Answer 7

• lots of evidence to suggest situation affects obedience
• Milgram’s research clearly shows changes in situation affect the obedience demonstrated by ppts

Question 8

weaknesses of situational factors affecting obedience and dissent?

Answer 8

• evidence lacks ecological validity - all from laboratory research, not true to real life
• personality differences may have been the cause, there were variations in how obedience affected individual ppts in exps