obedience Flashcards
obedience vs conformity
obedience- social influence from a person of authority
conformity- involves a group + no explicit demand to follow orders
definition of obedience
to comply with the demands of someone you see as an authority figure or with power
Milgram’s experiment: AIM
- why people obey authority figures Milgram wanted to know why such a high proportion of the German population obeyed Hitler’s commands to murder Jews, homosexuals + other social groups during WW2.
Milgram’s experiment: PROCEDURE
- 40 American men (20-50 years old) volunteered to participate on Milgram’s study (supposedly on memory)
- each volunteer was introduced to another participant (confederate) upon arrival
- 2 participants drew to see who teacher + learner was (but draw was fixed as participant was always teacher + confederate learner)
- one participant (confederate)= asked set word pairs + teacher would test knowledge
- they were placed in adjacent rooms where teacher was set Infront of controls to electric shock participant after an incorrect answer –> each incorrect answer= higher voltage shock
- when teacher showed reluctance to injure learner they were encouraged to continue
Milgram’s experiment: PROCEDURE
how many ppts were there, how did they apply + what age + culture were they?
- 40 American men
- ages 20-50
- volunteered to participate
Milgram’s experiment: PROCEDURE
was the draw on who was learner and who was teacher fair?
- no was fixed, confederate was always learner, and participant was always teacher
- both slips said ‘teacher’ but ppt just chose slip first
Milgram’s experiment: PROCEDURE were the teacher and learner in same room?
adjacent rooms
Milgram’s experiment: PROCEDURE what was the learner asked + what was the consequence for incorrect answers?
- asked set word pairs + learner had to remember what had originally paired with the first word by pressing 1 of 4 switches
- if incorrect answer= electric shock which increased in voltage with each incorrect answer
- learners responses were predetermined though (3 incorrect to 1 correct- yet they had to make fake noises to pretend pain when shocked)
Milgram’s experiment: PROCEDURE what would happen if the teacher was reluctant to continue with procedure?
- encouragement to continue from experimenter
- these were prods e.g. ‘please continue’, if prods were successful after 4= experiment ended
Milgram’s experiment: RESULTS
- 65% of ppts went up to 450V (‘danger severe shock’)
- 100% ppts went up to 300V (‘intense shock’)
- many ppts showed emotional distress e.g. seizures, shaking, sweating
Milgram’s experiment: RESULTS
what was the maximum voltage participant could go up to?
15V-450V
Milgram’s experiment PROCEDURE were the shocks real?
no- only teachers believed it was real
Milgram’s experiment RESULTS % of people that went up to 450V?
65%
Milgram’s experiment RESULTS % of people that went up to 300V?
100%
Milgram’s experiment CONCLUSIONS
- people more willing to harm someone if responsibility is taken away from them + passed to someone else
- situational factors can explain destructive obedience
- people can experience high stress + anxiety when given orders to act destructively
Milgram’s experiment- experimental (internal) validity
- 70% ppts believed tasks
- experimenter followed similar rules to social situations
- ppts could leave + still be paid
BUT - demand characteristics
- ppts were paid so obedience is in a contract not general
- Gina Perry discovered only half ppts believed shocks were real
Milgram’s experiment- ecological (external) validity?
- Milgram did variations of experiment in different settings
- cross-cultural studies + findings (Smith + Bond) collected findings in other countries + produced similar results
- research support in NYC where ppts in legitimate uniform meant ppl were 2x more likely to obey
BUT - lab, artificial setting
- participants were all male + had a ‘volunteer personality’
location of Milgram’s study?
Yale university
ethical issues of Milgram’s experiment?
- deception (ppts. didn’t know purpose of their role) BUT necessary to make task seem real + get results
- debriefing- Milgram debriefed ppts to ensure behaviour was normal + that they had no harm
- consent- Milgram got presumptive consent
- right to withdraw- ppts. needed to know they could leave at any time + get paid regardless (but prods etc?)
- distress- 84% ppts= happy they participated, 15% neutral, 1.3% regretted participating
who else got similar results to Milgram?
- Beauvoir (80% of ppts. went to max. shock on an unconscious man)
where’s obedience recently been shown?
- american soldiers who torture Iraqi prisoners claiming they were just following orders
Milgram- situational factors affecting obedience? (variations of his study)
proximity
uniform
location
situational factor- proximity in original study?
teacher + learner were in diff. rooms
experimenter + teacher in same room
situational factor- proximity in variation?
% of people that went up to 450V:
- absent experimenter - 20.5%
- teacher + learner in same room- 40%
- teacher had to force learners hand onto electric plate- 30%
situational factor- proximity explanation?
- decreased proximity= people can psychologically distance themselves from consequence of their actions when have to witness= becomes difficult
situational factor- location in original study?
in research lab in Yale university
situational factor- location in variation?
% of people that went up to 450V:
- study in rundown building- 47.5%
situational factor- location explanation?
- people more likely to be obedient in uni. environment as they perceived the experimenter had legitimate authority + obedience was expected
situational factor- uniform in original study?
experimenter wore a lab coat
situational factor- uniform in variation?
% of people that went up to 450V:
- experimenter replaced by a member of public in ordinary clothes- 20%
situational factor- uniform explanation?
- uniforms= associated as symbols of authority so encourage obedience as people see them as legitimate authority figures
situational factors- other variables to be aware of?
SUPPORT- teacher had buddies around them- 10%
someone else delivers shocks + presses buttons- 92.5%
situational factors why people obey?
- proximity, location, uniforms
- agentic state
- legitimacy of authority
dispositional factors why people obey?
- authoritarian personality
Legitimacy of authority (LoA) explain
- LoA= explanation of obedience suggesting we’re more likely to obey ppl we perceive to have authority over us –> authority justified by individual’s power in hierarchy
- society= structured in a hierarchy–> people at top of hierarchy because of authority they hold= agreed by society
–> most people unconsciously allow LoA figures to exercise power= allows society to function –> we automatically assume that if LoA gives us an order there must be a valid reason
what’s destructive authority?
- e.g. Hitler, Stalin + shown in Milgram’s study
- powerful leaders that can use their legitimate powers for destructive purposes
Milgram’s agency theory- what’s the agentic state
- individuals allow someone else to direct their behaviour- they pass responsibility to them
- condition where person sees himself as an agent for carrying out another persons wishes
Milgram’s agency theory- where’s agentic state shown in Milgram’s experiment?
- when experimenter said they were responsible + ppts. go through with procedure with no further objections
Milgram’s agency theory- what did Steven Rank’s study find out?
- 16 out of 18 nurses refused to give excessive drug dosage to a patient when doctor aske them to
BUT - for commanding officers in US army= more legitimate + has greater impact
Milgram’s agency theory- what is autonomous state?
- individual direct their own behaviour + take responsibility for consequences
Milgram’s agency theory- what is agentic shift?
move from autonomous state (free-will) to acting as an agent for another person
Milgram’s agency theory- will a person be distressed when entering agentic state?
- sometimes e.g. Milgram’s experiment
- BUT they don’t see themselves as RESPONSIBLE
Milgram’s agency theory- when we act as an agent of someone in authority…
it’s easy to deny personal responsibility for our actions as we are just doing our job/activities
Milgram’s agency theory- what might a person feel if they see themself as an agent?
may feel moral strain but remain in agentic state due to binding factors
Milgram’s agency theory-what is moral strain?
doing something we believe to be immoral in order to function as an agent of authority
Milgram’s agency theory- what is binding factors?
aspects of situation that allow agent to deny the effect of their actions on the victim
authoritarian personality- background
what is the Adorno F test (who was it proposed by etc)?
- proposed by Fromm in 1941
- it explains those holding right wing, conservative views
- characterised by belief in absolute obedience and submission to authority
- Fromm was trying to explain absolute obedience and submission to authority
authoritarian personality- what is it?
- someone who submits to authority’s of those in a higher position
- authoritative to those of lower status
- shows excessive/blind obedience to authority
- conventional/conformist
- suspicious (may fear harm + damage society, don’t trust anyone, hostile
authoritarian personality- what are some causes of a authoritarian personality?
- strict upbringing with critical, harsh parents
- person can’t show hostility to parents so transfers it to weaker e.g. ppl with less education= safer targets
authoritarian personality- what did Middendorf suggest?
less educated= more authoritarian than well-educated ppl
suggests a lack of education could be responsible for authoritarianism + obedience= reduces likelihood that authoritarianism causes obedience
authoritarian personality- what do we expect to see a correlation between?
- between authoritarianism + prejudice
- more authoritarian= more likely to be prejudice
authoritarian personality- what did Milgram’s experiment show?
- 65% went up to 450V BUT we can’t say they all have an authoritarian personality
authoritarian personality- what is an F scale?
- high score on test= high authoritarian personality= more likely to obey orders
- low score on test= low authoritarian personality= less likely to obey orders
- normally see a bell graph (normal distribution) in test–> suggests internal validity + very few people at each extreme
situational explanations, evaluation? Milgram
- when responsibility= shifted (experimenter said ‘I’m responsible’)= ppts continued with no objections (support for agentic state)
- Rank + Jacobson’s study found 16/18 nurses didn’t obey to doctor + overdose a patient
- explains cultural differences in obedience (strength of legitimacy explanation) –> different research, 16% Australian females went up to 450V vs 85% Germans
- innate tendencies may have a bigger influence on behaviour/obedience rather than legitimacy of authority figure
dispositional explanations, evaluation? Milgram
- elms + milgram got ppl from experiment who were fully obedient to do an F scale test –> 20 obedient ppts scored higher than disobedient.
BUT obedient + authoritarian also have many differences= doesn’t fully support Adorno et Al’s view (that people that are obedient show similar traits to people with an authoritarian personality) - F-scale political bias as only measures tendency towards an extreme form
Adorno et Al what did he study?
1950, he studied authoritarian personality with 2000 middle class white Americans and their unconscious attitudes towards other racial groups using Fromm’s scale
Adorno et al findings
- submit to authority of those in higher positions
- is authoritative of themselves to those of lower status
- Shows excessive and blind obedience to authority
- Conventional and conformist
- Conventional ‘sex stereotypes’
- Suspicious and hostile of other groups of persons (strong positive correlation between prejudice and AP)
