Factors Affecting Obedinece - Situational And Cultural Factors, (SP) Flashcards
Define situational factors
Features of the immediate physical and social environment which may influence a person’s behaviour
Evaluate the strength of situational factors (with supportive evidence)
A strength of situational factors affecting obedience is supportive evidence from Milgram’s variations on legitimacy of environment and proximity.
Milgrams telephonic and rundown office block experiment emphasises how environment and proximity have an impact on obedience. In the telephonic experiment, the experimenter gave the participants the instructions from the phone rather then being physically present. Only 22.5% of participants went to the full 450V. In the rundown office block experiment, instead of being set up in Yale university the experiment was one in a rundown office building. The amount of obedience dropped to 48% compared to it being 65% in Yale.
Therefore, this shows that changing the immediate physical and social environment will affect the level to which people are willing to obey authority
Define cultural factors, and the two groups included
The ideas, customs and social behaviour of a particular group of people or society. The two groups included are individualism and collectivism
Explain individualism
• Each individual takes care of themselves and their immediate family only
• Think in terms of “I”
• Value independence
• Personal opinion, personal mind is valued
• Working for benefit of self
Explain collectivism
• People identify with and take care of respective families and communities
• Think in terms of “we”
• Value belonging
• Shared values, ideas, opinions
• Working for benefit of the group
Evaluate the weakness of cultural factors (with supportive evidence)
Most nations around the world show similar high levels of obedience.
Blass (2012) found an average of 65.94% obedience across other countries, compared with 60.94% for the US replications. These countries varied in terms of their collectivism and individualism levels, but the average obedience levels were quite similar.
Therefore, we can conclude that perhaps obedience is in fact a universal social behaviour and culture doesn’t affect it much
Define power distance index and give the two groups included
The measure of how accepting people are of inequality and hierarchy in society. The two groups are high power distance and low power distance
Explain high power distance
If there is a high power distance, the subordinate is more likely to accept the authority of their superior. A dependent relationship
People from cultures with high PDI are more accepting of power being held by authority figures.
As such are less likely to question orders from those authority figures and are more obedient
E.g. of countries Latin American countries, Asian countries, African countries, Saudi Arabia
Explain low power distance
If there is a low power distance, the subordinate is more likely to question the authority of their superior. Seeking cooperation, a more interdependent relationship, less accepting of the authority
People from low PDI cultures are more likely to question those in power. Which can increase rates of dissent
E.g. of countries Australia, Canada, New Zealand, United States
Evaluate the strength of power distance index (with supportive evidence)
Cultural dimensions do correlate with obedience. A strength of cultural explanations is a close relationship between obedience and Hofstede’s cultural dimension (PDI).
For example, Kilham and Mann (1974) found a strikingly low level of obedience of 28% in Australia. which scores very low for power distance (36%) while a very recent replication in Poland by Dolinski et al. (2017) found a very high level of obedience of 90% as one might expect in a country with a much higher power distance score of 68%.
This suggests that Hofstede’s power distance dimension is useful in predicting obedience.
