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
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
