Obedience Flashcards
Milgrams research procedure
- 40 American men volunteered to take part in study at Yale university supposedly on memory
- Draw was fixed do the participant was always the Teacher
- Experimenter wore grey lab coat
- Teacher had to give learner electric shock each mistake -> increase in 15 volts up to 450V
Milgrams baseline findings
- Every participant delivered all the shocks up to 300V
- 12.5% stopped at 300V, 65% continued up to 450V
- Participants showed signs of extreme tension -> sweat, tremble, stutter
Milgrams conclusion
- German people are not ‘different’
- American participants were willing to obey orders even when they might harm someone
Strength of Milgrams study
Replicated in a French documentary
Participants believe they were contestants and paid to give electric shocks to other participants
80% delivered maximum shock of 460V to an apparently unconscious man
Limitation of Milgrams research
- Low internal validity
- May not have been testing what her intended to test
- Holland and Orne argued that participants behaved as they did because they didn’t believe in the set up so were ’play acting’
- Perry listened to tapes of participants and reported that on about half of them believed the shocks were real
Suggests participants may have been responding to demand characteristics
Proximity
- In the proximity variation of Milgrams study teacher and learner were in the same room -> obedience rate dropped from 65% to 40%
- In the touch proximity variation teacher had to force hand of learner onto electric shock plate -> obedience dropped to 30%
- In remote instruction variation the Experimenter left the room and gave instructions by telephone -> obedience reduced to 20.5%
Explanation for proximity
Decreased proximity allows people to psychologically distance themselves from consequences of their actions
Less aware of the harm they were causing to another person so more obedient
Location
Milgrams conducted varitation in a run down office block rather than in Yale Univerity setting - obedience fell to 47.5%
Explanation for location
Prestigious university environment gave Milgrams study legitimacy and authority - participants perceived that the Experimenter shared this legitimacy and that obedience was expected
Uniform
- Experimenter called away because of an inconvenient phone call at the start of the procedure
- Role was take over by ‘ordinary member of the public’ in everyday clothes
- Obedience dropped to 20%
Explanation for uniform
- Encourage obedience because they are widely recognised symbols of authority
- Their authority is legitimate and entitled to expect obedience
Research support for situational variables
- Bickman had 3 confederates dressed in different outfits
- Individually stood on the street and asked people to perform tasks e.g. picking up litter
- People were twice as likely to obey the assistant dressed as a security guard than jacket and tie
Limitation of Milgrams situational variables research
- Low internal validity
- When experimenter is replaced by member of the public even Milgrams recognised that this situation was so contrived that some participants may well have worked out the truth
- Unclear whether findings are genuinely due to the operation or demand characteristics
Agentic state
Mental state where we feel no personal responsibility for our behaviour because we believe ourselves to be acting for an authority figure
Autonomous state
Being aware of the consequences of one’s own actions and therefore taking voluntary control of own behaviour
Agentic shift
Shift from autonomy to agency
Binding factors
Aspects of the situation that allow the person to ignore or minimise damaging effect of their behaviour
Reduces ‘moral strain’ they are feeling
Research support for Agentic state
When participants asked experimenter who was resoponsible, research claimed responsibility which meant they often went through the procedure quickly with no further objections
Limitation for Agentic shift
- Rank and Jacobson’s found that 16 out of 18 hospital nurses disobeyed orders from a doctor
- Almost all nurses remained autonomous
- Suggests the Agentic shift can only account for some situations of obedience
Legitimacy of authority
Explanation for obedience which suggests that we more likely to obey people who we perceive to have authority over us
Authority is justified by the individuals position of power within a social hierarchy
Destructive authority
Obvious in Milgrams study when the Experimenter used prods to order participants to behave in ways that went against their consciences
Strength of legitimacy explanation
- Many studies show that countries differ in the degree to which people are obedient to authority
- 16% of female Australian participants went all the way to 450 V in a Milgram style study
Limitation of legitimacy
- Cannot explain instances of disobedience in a hierarchy where the legitimacy of authority is clear and accepted
- E.g. nurses in Rank and Jacobsons study - more were disobedient despite working in rigidly hierarchal authority structure
Authoritarian personality
- Extreme respect for and submissive to authority
- Unflexible world view -> rigid thinking, ‘different’ people’s ideas are wrong
- Comes from harsh parenting - feelings of resentment + hostility can’t be expressed to parents so displaced onto others who are weaker -> scapegoating
Adorno et al’s research
- Studied 2000 middle class white American’s and their unconscious attitudes towards racial groups
- Uses the Facism scale to measure authoritarian personality
- People who scored higher identified with ‘strong’ people
- Had certain cognitive style and had fixed position opinions of other groups
Positive correlation between authoritarian and prejudice
Strength of Authoritarian personality
- Milgram interviewed sample of people who had participated in original obedience studies
- All completed the F scale
- 20 obedient participants scored significantly higher on F scale than a comparison group of 20 disobedient participants
Limitation for Authoritarian personalities
- Researchers analysed the individual sub scales of the F scale
- Found obedient p’s had characteristics unusual for Authoritarians
- e.g. didn’t glorify fathers, didn’t experience unusual levels of punishment in childhood and did not have hostile attitudes towards mothers
- Link is complex
