Obedience Cor Theory Theory Of Situational Factors and critisms Flashcards
Need to know for theory
What did Milgram show?
Milgram showed that social influence can trigger obedience to hurtful instructions. Volunteers from public took part in a lab experiment at a famous USA uni. They were told they were taking part in a experiment about punishment and memory. Mr Wallace is an actor player the role if ‘the learner’ told to give wrong answers. The participants had to give mr Wallace an ‘electric shock’ every time he gave the wrong answer they had to increase the strength. If the participant hesitated to give the shock the experimenting (in a lab coat) would say ‘please go on. It is important for the research.’ Everyone went to intense shock (300v). 65% went to danger (450v).
What is this theory about?
There’s a number of variable that influence the process of obedience or difiance. These are best understood using well known research studies into obedience.
Need to know for theory.
How does hofling et al. show that obedience is also a fact of life in the ‘real world’?
(Highest ecological validity)
The real world setting was a number of psychiatric hospitals in the USA. The participants are 22 nurses on night duty. They were phoned by an unknown doctor (dr smith) telling them to give 20 milligrams of a astrofen to a patient. The bottle said max 10 milligrams, was not allowed in the ward, and was taken from an unknown dr (big no no). Still 21 (all but 1) nurses went to administer the drug.
Possible effect of setting?
Refers to the fact we act obediently because of where we are. Eg dentist, post office. Milgrams study was then done in a run down office building. The 65% that went to the danger level dropped to 47.5% in the office building. Shows place plays a part in the level of obedience. With Hoftling et al. would the nurses have been so obedient outside their work place or did they see it as their duty.
Possible effect of the cultural setting?
Most experiments were done in the USA with White middle class males keen to earn some money so can we generalise this to other societies or cultures. Milgrams research was carried out in a number of countries. Australia 40%. Italy 80%. Austria 85%. The level of obedience is affected by whether it's collectivist cultures (individuals share tasks, belongings and income) or individualist societies (individuals control rights and interests), individualist societies are less obedient.
Possible effects of the power of an authority figure with the power to punish?
If someone has authority we are more likely to obey. Authority= power to punish. In countries with a dictator obedience levels were very high in ordinary people. Milgrams experiment was done again with a acting participant to give the orders. The level of obedience went down 20% as they saw them with no more authority than themselves. In Hoftling et al. study many nurses said if they didn’t obey orders then they feared losing their jobs.
Possible effects of the impact of consensus on obedience?
The impact of consensus makes it impossible for us not to obey. The more of them the more obedient we are. We follow each other like sheep, this works for disobedience too. In Milgrams variation the real participants were in groups of three doing the experiment. Only one was a genuine participant. The other 2 disobeyed orders to shock mr Wallace, only 10% went to the danger level. Strength in numbers.
A lot of research into situational factors in obedience lacks…?
A lot of research into situational factors in obedience lacks ecological validity. Eg milgrams set-up in the lab wasn’t believable, they must have wandered way they and not him had to punish mr Wallace. Must have been playing along- demand characteristics.
A lot of research into situational factors has ____ problems?
A lot of research into situational factors has ethical problems. It involves manipulating situations to see which factor had the effect on obedience. By manipulating factors it often causes distress & embarrassment, deceiving people and potentially causing long-term harm.
Main criticism is that it’s not given enough weight to?
It’s not given enough weight to the role of personality. Suggests our behaviour is just a reflex or reaction to something or someone. As if we live life on auto pilot, ignoring parts of our human make-up such as feelings, ambitions, frustration, imagination, sense of right and wrong and so on.
