Lesson 7: Situational explanations of Obedience

Question 1

According to Milgram (1974), why are people likely to obey horrific orders?

Answer 1

people are likely to obey horrific orders because of the situation they are in (this is why it is
a situational explanation).

Question 2

Fill in the blank:
According to Milgram, when following orders individuals tend to go from a 1)__________ to a 2) ___________

Answer 2

1) Autonomous state
2) Agentic state

Question 3

What is this change from an autonomous state to an agentic state referred to as?

Answer 3

Agentic shift

Question 4

What do people do once in the agentic state?

Answer 4

1)people ‘unthinkingly’ carry out orders and perceive themselves as merely the INSTRUMENT of an authority figure

2) Diffusion of responsibility

Question 5

What is meant by diffusion of responsibility?

Answer 5

The thought process an individual adopts in the agentic state whereby they believe that the AUTHORITY FIGURE is responsible for their actions

Therefore as a result they do not follow their OWN conscience or feel guilt for their actions

Question 6

Why does the agentic state occur?

Answer 6

1) in people’s experience those in authority are usually TRUSTWORTHY, orders seem reasonable at first before becoming more aggressive (gradual commitment)

AND
2) people are psychologically protected from the consequences of their actions (BUFFERS)

Question 7

Why do people adopt an agentic state?

Answer 7

to maintain a POSITIVE SELF IMAGE

-it does not matter what negative behaviour they show because theyre not responsible for their ACTIONS

Question 8

Why do people stay in the agentic state?

Answer 8

they are concerned that breaking their COMMITMENT to the authority figure would seem ARROGANT or RUDE

Question 9

When did Milgram think the agentic state had developed?

Answer 9

agentic state= developed during human evolution

+ is necessary for hierarchies to function in society which prevents chaos

Question 10

State a positive evaluation of the Agentic state
(Hint: buffers+ likelihood of shocks)

Answer 10

Participants were less likely to shock Mr.Wallace when they were in the same ROOM as him an could see the CONSEQUENCES of their actions. (i.e no buffers)

This supports the idea of an AGENTIC state-> being in close proximity + seeing Mr wallace in pain= no agentic state