P1: Social Influence Flashcards
What is the agentic state?
A mental state where we feel no personal responsibility for our behaviour because we believe ourselves to be acting for an authority figure.
This frees us from the demands of our consciences and allows us to obey even a destructive authority figure.
What is the autonomous state?
The opposite to an agentic state. This is the belief that we are free to behave on our own accord and hold responsibility for our actions.
What is the agentic shift?
The shift from autonomy to agency.
Milgram suggested that this occurs when we perceive someone else as an authority figure.
They have greater power as they have a higher position in the social hierarchy.
Support for the agentic state as an explanation of obedience:
Milgram’s study.
Most of the ppts resisted giving shocks asking ‘who is responsible?’
Only when the experimenter took responsibility woul they proceed without objection.
This shows that once the ppt believed they were not responsible they acted more easily as the Experimenter’s agent.
Limitations of the agentic state as an explanation for obedience eg nurses:
Can only explain some situations of obedience.
Rank and Jacobson-
16/18 nurses disobeyed orders from a doctor to administer an excessive drug dose to a patient.
What is legitimacy of authority?
An explanation for obedience which suggests that we are more likely to obey people who we perceive to have authority over us. The authority is justified by the individual’s position in the social hierarchy.
Support for legitimacy of authority as an explanation of obedience
Explains cultural differences
Many studies show that countries differ in extent of obedience.
Kilham and Mann - Only 16% of Australian women went up to the lethal volts in a Milgram style study. David Mantell- German women were much higher at 85%.
In some cultures authority is more likely to be accepted as legitimate and demands obedience.
Limitations for legitimacy of authority as an explanation of obedience
Cannot explain all disobedience in a hierarchy where legitimacy of authority is clear and accepted
Nurses in Rank and Jacobson’s study- most were disobedient despite working in a rigidly hierarchical environment
Also, a significant minority of Milgram’s participants disobeyed despite recognising the Experimenter’s scientific authority.
People may just be less/more obedient than others.
What are the situational variables affecting obedience?
Proximity, Location and Uniform
How does proximity affect obedience?
The physical closeness or distance of an authority figure to the person they are giving the order to.
Eg. closeness of the teacher to the learner in Milgram’s study.
Example of proximity in Milgram’s study:
In the baseline study the Teacher could hear the Learner but not see them.
In the proximity variation they were in the same room.
The obedience rate dropped from 65% to 40% when they could no longer distance themselves from their actions.
When they had to force the learners hand this dropped further to 30%.
When the experimenter left the room obedience dropped to 20.5%.
How does location affect obedience?
The place where an order is issued. The status or prestige of the setting can affect obedience.
Eg. the run down office block vs the University in Milgram’s study
Example of location in Milgram’s study:
Milgram conducted a variation in a run down office block rather than the prestigious Yale University.
Obedience fell to 47.5%.
The prestigious setting had given the study legitimacy and authority.
Obedience was still high however as ppt’s perceived the scientific nature of the study.
How does uniform affect obedience?
People in positions of authority usually have particular outfits which are symbolic of their authority. This indicates that they are entitled to expect obedience.
Eg. the jackets in Milgram’s study
Example of uniform in Milgram’s study
In the baseline study the experimenter wore a grey lab coat as a symbol of their authority.
In one variation the experimenter was called away and replaced by an ‘ordinary member of the public’ in everyday clothes.
The obedience rate dropped to 20%- the lowest of the variations.
-Someone without a uniform has less right to expect obedience
Support for situational variables affecting obedience- Bickman
Bickman (1974) Field study in New York
Three confederates; milkman, business man and security officer
Confederates individually stood on the street and asked passers by to complete tasks- collect litter/ hand over a coin for the parking
People were twice as likely to obey the security guard than the milkman/businessman
Situational variables, Uniform, have a powerful impact on obedience
Support for situational variables affecting obedience- Cross culture
Cross-cultural replications
Dutch study- 90% of ppts obeyed to saying stressful things in an interview to someone desperate for the job.
When the person giving the orders was not present obedience dropped significantly
Suggests that Milgram’s findings are revelant across cultures as well as genders
Limitation of situational variables affecting obedience
Low internal validity
Participants have been aware that the procedure was fake
Orne and Holland, even more likely in his variations because of the manipulation of variables eg. when the experimenter was replaced with a ‘member of the public’
Milgram himself recognised that may ppts may have worked out the truth
Lack of clarity whether findings are valid - demand characteristics etc
Outline Milgram’s study into obedience
Baseline procedure to assess obedience levels- later adapted to make comparisons.
40 male volunteers (unaware of the studies aim)
Supposedly drew lots to become teacher or learner- always teacher
Gave small shocks to learners for incorrect answers.
Every ppt delivered all shocks up to 300 volts
12.5% stopped at 300 - 65% continued to the highest level of 450
Concluded that german people ‘aren’t different’
Strengths of Milgram’s study into obedience
Replicated in a French documentary
80% of contestants gave the maximum shock of 460 volts to an apparently unconscious man
Their behaviour was almost identical to that of Milgram’s ppts
This supports his findings
Limitations of Milgram’s study
Ethical issues- Deception
Thought shocks were real and allocation was random- could have serious consequences for the ppts
But Milgram did offer a debrief
Low internal validity
May not have been testing what he intended, Orne and Holland suggested that ppts were ‘play-acting’ as they saw past the deception- demand characteristics
What is the Authoritarian Personality?
A type of personality that Adorno suggested was especially susceptible to obeying authority.
Such individuals are thought to be submissive to those of higher status and dismissive to inferiors.
What are the origins of the Authoritarian personality?
Forms in childhood mostly from harsh parenting.
Focus on discipline, expectation of absolute loyalty, impossible high standards and severe criticism of perceived failings.
Parents provide conditional love.
These childhood experiences create resentment and hostility in the child who cannot explain their feelings in fear of punishment.
Fears are displaced onto those they perceive as weaker.
Outline Adorno’s study into the Authoritarian personality
Studied more than 2000 middle class white Americans and their unconscious attitudes towards different ethnic groups using measurement scales including the F scale (potential for facism). Eg. obedience and respect for authority are the most important virutes a child can learn People with authoritarian leanings identified with 'strong' people and were contemptuous for the 'weak,' they were very conscious of their status
