Obedience- Social Factors

Question 1

What are two social-psychological factors for obedience?

Answer 1

1. Agentic state
2. Legitimacy of authority

Question 2

What Is the Agentic state?

Answer 2

When a person sees themselves as an agent for carrying out another person’s wishes

Question 3

What is the autonomous state?

Answer 3

When a person sees themselves as free to behave according to their own principles

Question 4

What is an agent shift?

Answer 4

The shift from being autonomous to taking on the agent state- normally in the presence of a perceived authority

Question 5

What are the binding factors?

Answer 5

Aspects of the situation that bing us to the task and help us to block out the moral strain we are experiencing

Question 6

What is legitimacy of authority?

Answer 6

A person who is perceived to be in a position of social control within a situation

Question 7

What are the two strengths of social- psychological factors?

Answer 7

Research support- Most of Milgram’s ptpts resisted giving the shocks as some point and often asked experimenter ‘who is responsible if the learner is harmed’ when the experimenter replied ‘ I am responsible’ the participant would continue with the procedure with no hesitation

Real life application- It can be used to explain how obedience can lead to real-life war crimes. E.G The My Lai Massacre in 1968. during the Vietnam war American soldiers killed 504 unarmed civilians. women were gang raped and people shot in there homes. This can be understood through the power of the hierarchy in the US army. One solider faced charges, his defence was he was simply doing his duty by following orders

Question 8

What are the two limitations of social-psychological factors?

Answer 8

Agent state or cruelty- Milgram had detected signs of cruelty among his ptpts who has used the situation to express their sadistic impulses. Furthermore, in Zimbardo’s experiment the guards inflicted rapidly escalating cruelty and brutality on increasingly submissive prisoners despite there being no authority figure telling them to do so.

The obedience alibi- Although there can be many positive consequences to legitimacy of authority it cab also be used as a justification for harming others. If a person authorises another person to make judgments for them they no longer feel their own moral values are relevant.

Question 9

What is a dispositional explanation for obedience?

Answer 9

The perception of obedience as caused by internal characteristics of individuals (their personality)

Question 10

What is an authoritarian personality?

Answer 10

A type of personality which facilitates an individual to obedience

Question 11

What are some traits of someone with an authoritarian personality?

Answer 11

1. respects obedience to those in authority
2. dismissive of those deemed as inferior
3. Distinct ‘cognitive style’ - the world is black and white/ right and wrong
4. belief that we need strong and powerful leaders to promote traditional values

Question 12

What are the origins of the authoritarian personality?

Answer 12

Stems from strict disciplinarian parenting- conditional love, impossibly high standards, expectations to be completely loyal

Question 13

How do these parading styles lead to scapegoating?

Answer 13

These childhood experiences create hostility and despair in the child who then cannot express these feelings to a parent (fear of punishment) instead they displace these emotions onto the ‘weak’

Question 14

What is the Adorno et al. (1950) study?

Answer 14

The aim was the measure someone degree of authoritarian personality. The experimenter interviewed 2000 middle class, white Americans and measured their unconscious attitudes towards other racial groups. Adarno created the F-Scale ( f standing for fascism). The scale contained 30 questions assessing nine personality variables. The results found that people with an AP identified with the strong and pitied the weak, and were driven by stereotypes and prejudice. These individuals were aware of their won status (and those around them) and as a result showed extreme respect and flattery to those of higher status and patronised those of lower status.

Question 15

What was Elms’ and Milgram’s (1966) study?

Answer 15

They wanted to study the link between authoritarian personality and obedience. To study if the more obedient ptpts more likely to have an authoritarian personality. The sample was 20 obedient ptpts who administered the full 450v and 20 who refused to continue, each ptpt took an f-scale test and personality tests. They found that obedient ptpts scored significantly higher on the f-scale test in comparison to the disobedient ptpts.

Question 16

What is the strength of dispositional factors?

Answer 16

Research support- Elms and Milgram found that people with who were obedient in Milgram’s study were more likely to have an authoritarian personality using Adorno’s f-scale test.

Counter- The findings from this experiment are correlational. That makes it impossible to draw the conclusion that authoritarian personality causes obedience.

Question 17

What are the three limitations of dispositional explanations?

Answer 17

Political bias- The f-scale measures the tendency towards an extreme form of right-wing ideology. This is a politically bias interpretation of a authoritarian personality, as it does not take into account the possibility of left-wing authoritarianism. Right and left wing ideologies have a lot in common, they both emphasise the importance of complete obedience to legitimate political authority.
Counter- There is evidence that suggest that left-wing people are less likely to obey compared to those who identify as right-wing. proposing it is correct to identify the authoritarian personality with right-wing. E.G Begue et al. (2014) held a fake game show that was very similar to Milgrams study and found that people who were left wing were less likely to carry out the electrical shocks. It also revealed that obedient ptpts had a difficult relationship with their fathers growing up.

Methodological issues with using a questionnaire- The authoritarian personality is based on flawed methodology. The f-scale which is a questionnaire. Every oe pf the f-scale question sis worded in the same direction so it is possible to get a high score just by ticking all the same boxes. this can lead to acquiescence bias.

Contradictory evidence for the origins of authoritarian personality- In Elms and Milgrams study they asked people about their upbringing. Many of the obedient ptpts reported having a very good relationship with their parents.

Question 18

What is social support?

Answer 18

A situational explanation- the presence of people who resist social pressure to conform or obey can help others do the same

Question 19

What is the internal locus of control and who was it proposed by?

Answer 19

Dispositional explanation- the belief that we are responsible for what happens in our lives proposed by Rotter (1966)

Question 20

What is external locus of control?

Answer 20

Dispositional factor- The belief that what happens in our life is caused by event outside on our control

Question 21

How did Asch and Milgram show evidence for social support increasing resistance to conformity?

Answer 21

Asch- a dissenting confederate decreased conformity from 33% to 5.5%

Milgram- seeing a confederate disobey orders reduced obedience from 65% to 10%

Question 22

How is locus of control linked to resistance to social influence?

Answer 22

People who have higher LOC are:
1. more likely to be able to resist social pressure
2. more self-confident and don’t require approval from the group
3. information seekers: rely less on opinion of others- more likely to go against others

Question 23

What is the strength of social support?

Answer 23

Research support- Rees and Wallace (2015) found that people with a majority of friends who drink alcohol were significantly more likely to have engaged In drunkenness and binge drinking over the past 12 months. They also found they were able to resist pressured to drink when they had a friend or two who also resisted. (conformity)

Gamson et al. (1982) found higher levels of resistance to obedience than Milgram because of his ptpts were in groups and so were exposed to others disobeying which gave them social support to do the same: 88% of ptpts rebelled. (obedience)

Question 24

What is a limitation of social support?

Answer 24

Source of social support needs to be credited- Research evidence form Allens and Levine (1971) showed that social support can help with resistance to the influence of a group. In an Asch type task, when the dissenter was someone with apparently good eyesight, 64% of ptpts resisted conformity and when there was no social support only 3% resisted.

However, the study also showed that social support does not always help- when the dissenter had obviously poor eyesight (thick glasses) resistance was only 36%.

Question 25

What is the strength of Locus of control?

Answer 25

Research support- Holland (1967) repeated Milgrams study and measured whether ptpts had internal or external locus of control. He found that people who were classified as internals were more likely to disobey compared to those classified as externals. demonstrating that people with an internal LOC are more likely to resist authority.

Counter- Twenge et al. (2004) analysed data from American LOC studies over a 40 year period. They found that, overtime, people have become more resistant to obedience but also more external. if resistance was linked to an internal LOC, we would expect people to have become more internal: challenges the link between internal LOC and increasing resistant behaviour.

Question 26

What are the two limitations for locus of control?

Answer 26

Contradictory evidence- Twenge et al. (2004) analysed data from American LOC studies over a 40 year period. They found that, overtime, people have become more resistant to obedience but also more external. if resistance was linked to an internal LOC, we would expect people to have become more internal: challenges the link between internal LOC and increasing resistant behaviour.
Counter- it is possible that the results are due t a changing society whereby many things are out of personal control.

Limited application- Rotter (1982) argued that the LOC only plays a role in new situations and has very little influence over our behaviour in familiar situations where our previous experiences are more likely to influence our resistance to social pressure. E.G if pole have conformed or preyed to a situation in the past they are more likely to do the same thing again even if they have high intern LOC.