Obedience - Agency Theory

Question 1

Autonomous State

2

Answer 1

Our behaviour is self-directed

Take greater responsibility for the consequences of our actions

Question 2

Agentic Shift

4

Answer 2

Autonomous –> Agentic
Happens when we are confronted with a legitimate authority figure
Become submissive
Leads people to become destructively obedient

Question 3

Moral Strain

2

Answer 3

Symptoms of anxiety resulting from following orders that conflict with our morals
For the majority moral strain is not enough for defiance

Question 4

Cognitive Dissonance

Answer 4

The discomfort felt by someone who holds conflicting ideas at the same time
Leads to moral strain

Question 5

SODA

Answer 5

S - 1963 Study // 100% gave 300V shock, 65% gave full 450V // Supports the idea that in the face of legitimate authority we still carry out orders
O - Gina Perry (2012) // Examined Yale Archives and questioned the internal validity as many ppts. saw through the deception // Over 60% over all studies disobeyed the experimenter
D - Rank & Jacobsen (1977) Nurse Study // 89% failed to follow orders to deliver an overdose // Agentic shift isn’t inevitable even in face of legitimate authority
A - Application to military // Euphamisims ‘collateral damage’ to minimise moral strain so soldiers remain in the agentic state

Question 6

SODA Conclusion

Answer 6

In conclusion, it would appear that while Milgram provided extensive well-controlled experiments to explore destructive obedience, his theory is perhaps overstated and oversimplified. The agentic state is not inevitable and therefore it would be more beneficial to study to examine the factors that lead people to resist destructive obedience.