L8 + L9 Obedience social influence Flashcards
Agentic State Theory = how came about
Milgrams original study in obedience was due to trial of Adolf Eichmann (1961), for war crimes
Eichmann was in charge of the Nazi camps, defense was that he “only obeying orders”
Lead Milgram to propose obedience to destructive authority, occurs because person not taking responsibility, acting as “agent”
Agent = someone acting for or in place of another
How Agentic Theory Explained by Milgram
Argued people act in two different ways in social situations
- when acting as independent individuals, people aware of consequences, of their own actions and its consequences, known as autonomic state
- in agentic state, state when individual carries out orders with little personal responsibility, they see themselves not responsible for actions they take, in this state they often carry orders out without question
**shift from autonomous (independent) state to agentic state is known as agentic shift
Milgram (1974) suggested this occurs when person perceives someone else as figure of authority, other person has greater power because of position in social hierarchy
Binding factors
Binding factors = why individual stays in agentic state
Include aspects of the situation allowing person ignore damage effects of their behaviour, reduce ‘moral strain’ they are feeling, shifting responsibility on victim (foolish to volunteer why did he take part)
Helps person feel in control, feel what they are doing is not in their control, merely agents following orders, fault lies in victim and authority figure
Application of Agentic State Theory on Milgrams Original Study
Applied to his own study, milgram found that participants viewed themselves as subordinates of the experimenter, not responsible for their own actions
Support of the theory, pps debriefed after experiment, many reported they knew it was wrong deliver dangerous shocks, felt they were expected to obey experimenter
Strengths of Agentic State Theory
Makes sense in explaining why we obey authority, supported by research.
Blass and Schmidt (2001) showed film of Milgrams study to some students, asked who was responsible for harming learner, Mr Wallace, students blamed experimenter rather than pp
Students also indicated experimenter was a scientist, at top of hierarchy, thus had authority, pps merely agents following orders from scientist
Weaknesses of Agentic State Theory
Doesnt explain many other research findings; why some pps didnt obey authority figure in Milgram study
Not explain why 1 nurse in Hoflings study did not give drug prescribed by doctor, who has higher social hierarchal position, where nurse should merely be an agent
Does not explain Rank and Jacobson study findings, only 2/18 nurses administered 3 times supposed dose of valium prescribed by doctor
Agentic State Theory does not explain why people who are “agents” still dont obey
Another weakness:
- research evidence refuted idea Nazis behaviour explained by agentic state theory, eg. Mandel (1998) explained one incident involving German Reserve Police Bataillion 101, men obeyed orders shoot civilians in Poland, but were not given direct orders to do, actually told they could do other duties if preferred, but Police still carried shootings out,
agentic state theory does not explain obedience, police were not acting as agents, did not have to shoot, but still chose to, why?
Background of Legitimacy of Authority
Many societies structured in hierarchal manner, people in certain social positions, hold authority over rest of us, parents, teachers, police
From early childhood we are told socialised to obey certain legitimate authority figures, referring to how much social power held by the person giving the instruction
Taught we should obey people with legitimate authority, as we trust them or fear punishment
Consequences of legitimate authority and application on Milgrams study
Some people are granted power to punish others, eg. In society we accept police and courts can punish people
In milgrams study : legitimate authority figure was a scientist, we are taught to have respect for scientists, and his white lab coat, manner of speaking and fact that he worked for Yale University added to authority status
Uniforms often symbol of legitimate authority, explains Bickmans study, individuals more likely to obey stranger if in uniform
But problem lies in when legitimate authority, becomes destructive, eg. History shown how powerful leaders (adolf hitler) used leg auth power for destructive purposes (eg. Holocaust)
Destructive authority shown in Milgrams study, when experimenter used prods on pps to administer lethal electric shocks to innocent learner
Strengths of legitimate authority
Need to have leg auth figures, in well functioning, ordered society thus strength of this explanation is it explains functioning of a civilised nation
eg. Leg auth figures, such as police, help prevent crime, society will not function well.
Also helps explain how obedience can lead to real life war crimes, eg. Kelman and Hamilton (1989), argues that the My Lai massacre can be understood in terms of power of hierarchy of US Army
My Lai massacre took place in 1968, during Vietnam War, 504 civillians killed, women were gang raped
Soldiers blew up buildings, burnt village and killed all animals
Only one soldier found guilty and faced charges, defence was the same as the Nazi officers went to trial at Nuremberg, he was only doing his duty to follow orders, clearly shows legitimacy of authority theory works in real life - hierarchal US Army follows orders from seniors, as what happened in My Lai
Another strength
- explains cultural differences in obedience, eg. Kilham and Mann (1974) replicated Milgrams study in Australia, found 16% went to the full voltage
- However, Mantell (1971) replicated milgrams study in germany found 85% obedience rate, both studies show cultural differences in perceived legitimacy of authority, how diff cultures have diff upbringing thus strengthening legitimacy of authority explanation
Weaknesses of Leg Auth Explanation
- not all authority figures should be obeyed, sometimes we will obey a legitimate auth figure, because of their status even if they disagree with their order, Milgrams study showed people will obey legitimate authority figure even if obedience led to harm to another person
In real life, been examples of legitimate authority figures who abused their power. Harold Shipman, as a doctor, a well known example, because he was a trusted, justified authority figure he was able to kill over 200 patients without suspicion
Suggests balance must be struck between teaching children to obey authority figures, but also encouraging them to sometimes question the orders they give just in case the order are destructive - teach our children to question legitimate authority if they are making unethical demands
L9 Obedience - dispositional factors - authoritarian personality
What is obedience?
Obedience refers to a type of social influence, causes a person to act in response to direct order from a figure with perceived authority, implying person carrying out order being made to do something that they otherwise would not have done
- dispositional explanation of obedience, known as authoritarian personality
Case study of Authoritarian Personality
Adorno (1950) proposed dispositional explanation of obedience, claiming that individuals personality characteristics determine their behaviour, not situational influences in the environment
Adorno argued authoritarian personalities more likely to obey authority figures, and they also have a collection of traits making them more obedient
- eg. Servile towards people with higher percieved higher status
- hostile towards people of lower status
- preoccupied with power
- inflexible in their beliefs and values
- conformist and conventional (rule followers)
- likely to categorise people as ‘us’ or ‘them’
- dogmatic (doesnt tolerate ambiguity)
Adorno (1950) thought people developed these personalities, due to receiving extremely harsh discipline from parents during upbringing, involving physical punishment, creates feelings of hostility, directed towards weaker others who cannot fight back therefore are safe
They cannot take out their anger on their parents because they fear them, so instead they act in a submissive way towards them, they then extend submissive behaviour to all authority figures
Adorno (1950) developed questionnaire, measuring authoritarian personalities called F (fascism) Scale, pps asked to rate how much they agree with statements such as “obedience and respect for authority are important virtues children should learn”, “rules are there to follow not to be changed”
- adorno tested more than 2000, middle class, white Americans, and their unconscious attitudes towards other racial groups, found there was a relationship between authoritarian personality, scoring high on F scale
What is fascism
Gov system led by dictator having complete power, forcibly suppressing opposition and criticism, regimenting all industry, commerce etc..
Emphasising an aggressive nationalism and often racism
Strengths of Dispositional Explanations - Authoritarian Personality
Research Support
- link between being obedient to authority and having an authoritarian personality, measured through F scale
- eg. Elms and Milgram (1966) carried out a follow up study using pps who had previously taken part in one of Milgrams experiments, 2 months before
Selected 20 obedient pps, continued to deliver electric shocks all the way up to 450 volts, and 20 disobedient pps, refused to shock all the way up to 450 volts
Each pps completed an MMPI scale, measures several personality traits and an F scale
Pps also asked series of open ended questions, about relationship with their parents, and their attitudes, to the experimenter and learner during previous experiment
Little difference between obedient and disobedient pps, in terms of MMPI scale, however there were higher levels of authoritarian traits in obedient pps, scored higher on F scale
Obedient pps, more likely to report being less close to fathers, describe them in neg terms, also more likely to perceive experimenter, authority figures, as admirable
Study shows authoritarian personality is strong dispositional explanation of obedience to authority, providing good research support, in that there is definitely a link between F scale and obedience
Another study
- support authoritarian personality was carried out by Miller (1975), found individuals scoring high on F scale, more likely to obey order to hold some electric wiring completing a test
study shows you will obey authority even if harming yourself suggesting this must be due to your personality
Also shown by Altemeyer (1981) asked pps to shock themselves if made mistake on a learning task, findings of this study also showed that those who scored high on the F scale questionnaires, were more likely to shock themselves again, showing link between authoritarian personality and obedience
Weaknesses of Authoritarian Personality - dispositional explanations
Limited Explanation
Saying that the reason why we obey authority is due to our authoritarian personality, is very limited explanation since doesn’t explain why majority of population in country (germany eg) very obedient, but not all germans possess authoritarian personality
Alternative to this explanation, is Social Identity Theory, explaning obedience whereby the Germans people identified with anti-semitic Nazi state, scapegoated the ‘outgroup’ of Jews
Social identity theory, is more relevant explanation of obedience than authoritarian personality
Methodological Problems
- based on flawed methodology
- adorno introduced F scale questionnaire, measure the obedient personality, many problems with the questionnaire itself
eg. Each item on questionnaire worded in same direction meaning it is fairly easy to get high score on authoritarian personality, moreover questions all closed, no room for explanation
- although adorno interviewed pps about childhood experiences, already knew their score on questionnaire, meaning he would have showed interviewer bias
