Obedience

Question 1

Obedience

Answer 1

• occurs within a hierarchy
• emphasis on power
• adopted behaviour may differ from authority figure
• prescription for action is explicit
• participant embrace obedience to explain behaviour

Question 2

Conformity

Answer 2

• Between people of equal status
• emphasis on acceptance
• behaviour adopted is similar to group
• group pressure is implicit (unspoken)
• participants deny conformity

Question 3

Stanley Milgram- how far people go to obey instructions

Answer 3

40 males of different backgrounds 
Two rooms, one with electric chair and other with shock generator 
‘Learner’ strapped to chair 
‘Teacher’ tested them on word pairs
Wrong answer=electric shock 
15-450 volts, prompted to continue

Question 4

Milgram results

Answer 4

All participants went to 300 volts 
65% to 450 volts 
Weren’t actually ‘learners’ 
\:( - ethics - deception 
Ordinary people obedient to authority even when inhumane 
Situational factors

Question 5

Situational factors- proximity

Answer 5

Researcher to teacher- experimenter gave orders over the phone
Obeying- 21%
Authority figure- depersonalised
Easy to obey

Teacher to learner- same room can hear learner
Obeying 40%
No longer depersonalised
Harder to obey

Question 6

Sf -Location

Answer 6

Advertising agency in a run down block with jeans and T-shirt
Obeying- 48%
Less legitimate power with location and clothing

Question 7

SF- Uniform

Answer 7

Experimenter called away and taken over by ‘an ordinary member of the public’ -confederate
Normal clothes and not a lab coat
Obedience - 20%
Not legitimate authority so easy to not obey

Question 8

SF- Two teacher condition

Answer 8

Participants could instruct an assistant (confederate) to press the switches
If personal responsibility is less than obedience increases
Obedience-92.5%
Milgram agency theory

Question 9

Milgram evaluation

Answer 9

:) - lab experiment, high control - reliability and cause and effect
:( - lack internal validity, participant may have worked it out the variations
Demand characteristics
:( - ethical issues

Question 10

1) Social psychological explanations - agentic state

Answer 10

Act as agents of the authority figure and hand over responsibility of our actions to them

Question 11

Social psychological explanations-Autonomous state

Answer 11

When we are responsible for our own behaviour

Question 12

Social psychological explanations- Binding factors

Answer 12

Aspects of a situation that allow a person to ignore the damaging effect of their behaviour- reduce moral strain
Shifting responsibility to victim to help us cope

Question 13

Agentic shift

Answer 13

Carry out orders without thinking of the consequences- believe authority figure to be responsible - more likely to obey -can cause moral strain

Question 14

Agentic state evaluation- strengths

Answer 14

:) - Milgram study showed participants demonstrating moral strain- laughing fits abs seizures -supports Agentic state will obey in the Agentic state

:) - real life situations- Nazi war criminals not responsible as they were following orders - make people aware of dangers of ignoring feelings of moral strain

Question 15

Agentic state evaluation- weaknesses

Answer 15

:( - other possible explanations such as social power French and Raven 5 types of power: legitimate power,reward power,coercive power,expert power, referent power - if Milgram held these powers his conclusions may be limited/inaccurate

Question 16

2) legitimate authority

Answer 16

Milgrams experiment - lab coat symbol of legitimate power and experience
Legitimate authority figure - police security etc

Question 17

Legitimate authority evaluation strengths

Answer 17

:)- research evidence- Tarnow study of aviation accidents-excessive dependence on the captain’s authority and expertise even if it was risky
:)- real life obedience- Kelman and Hamilton MY Lai massacre is explained by power hierarchy of the US army- soldiers assumed orders given by hierarchy are legal- give reasons why destructive obedience

Question 18

Legitimacy of authority evaluation- weakness

Answer 18

:(- other explanations may be more effective in explaining why people obey eg- gradual commitment suggests once people obey to small requests they find it more difficult to refuse escalating requests- so not the only reason

:(- may be used to justify harming others - when directed by authority to engage immoral actions people are willing to do them - no longer feel their own moral values are relevant and may excuse harmful actions

Question 19

Dispositional factors- authoritarian personality

Answer 19

Adorno et al- prejudice but s the result of an individual’s personality type

Piloted questionnaire - F-scale (Fascism scale) personality traits predisposed individuals to be highly sensitive to totalitarian and anti democratic ideas- prone to be highly prejudicial

Question 20

Authoritarian personality 2-

Answer 20

The F scale contained statements like “rules are there for people to follow and not change” agreeing=authoritarian personality

Authoritarian personality:
•Hostile to those lacking status but obedient to high status
• rigid in their opinions and beliefs
•conventional traditional values

Usually caused by a very strict upbringing- as not able to express hostility to parents so displaced on to safer targets who are weaker

Question 21

Adorno study

Answer 21

• to understand anti-semitism of the Holocaust and if obedience is a psychological disorder

Over 2000 white middle class American males studied using F-scale - unconscious attitude towards racial groups

Participant who scored high identified with strong people and were contemptuous of weak people
Also showed excessive respect to those of higher status
Strong correlation between authoritarianism and prejudice

Question 22

Elms and Milgram study

Answer 22

Follow up study on Milgram’s original work using participants who had previously taken part in one of Milgram’s experiments

20 obedient participants (450 volts)
20 defiant (refused to carry on)

Pp completed MMPI scale and F scale and open ended relationship questions

higher levels of authoritarianism in obedient participants than defiant
Obedient - less close relationships to fathers

Question 23

Elms and Milgram evaluation

Answer 23

:(- social context more important than disposition (proximity and location and presence of disobedient peers)

:(- not all Pps showed features of an authoritarian personality- not all had difficult relationships with fathers
- participant differences

:(- those who are less educated are consistently more obedient than those with higher education - other factors