psychology obedience

Question 1

what was milgrams baseline procedure

Answer 1

40 american men volunteered to take part in study on memory, each volutneer arrived they were introduced to another pps, they drew lots to see who would be the teacher and who would be the learner, the draw was fixed so that the pps were always the teacher, experimenter was involved, aimed to assess obedience in situation where an authority figure ordered pps to give an increasingly strong shock to learner located in different room, shocks were fake but teacher didnt know this

Question 2

what were the baseline findings of milgrams study

Answer 2

every pps delivered all shocks up to 300v, 12.5% pps stopped at 300v, 65% continued to highest level of 450v, collected qualitative data including observations such as pps showed signs of extreme tension-sweat tremble stutter bite their lips groan and dig their fingernails into their hands

Question 3

what was the other data to milgrams study

Answer 3

asked 14 psychology students to predict the pps behaviour-estimated no more than 3% of pps would continue to 450v, findings were unexpected students underestimated how obedient people actually are, all pps in baseline were debriefed and assured their behaviour was entirely normal, were sent a follow up questionnaire 84% said they were glad to have pps

Question 4

what were the conclusions to milgrams study

Answer 4

american pps were willing to obey orders even when they might harm another person, suspected there were certain factors in the situation that encouraged obedience so decided to conduct further studies to investigate these

Question 5

what wsa the research support milgram evaluation point

Answer 5

replicated in french doc that was made about reality tv, focused on game show made for programme, pps in the game believed they were contestants in pilot ep for new show called the game of death, they were paid to give fake electric shocks to other pps in front of studio audience, 80% delivered max shock of 460v to an apparently unconscious man, behaviour was almost identical to milgrams study, supports milgrams original study about obedience to authority and demonstrates that the findings were not just due to special circumstances

Question 6

what was low internal validity milgram evaluation point

Answer 6

may not have been testing what he intended to test
milgram reported 75% pps said they believed the shocks were genuine
orne and holland-pps behaved as they did because they didnt believe in the set up
perry-listened to tape of milgrams pps and reported only 1/2 of them believed the shocks were real, 2/3 of pps were disobedient
pps may have been responding to demand charactersitcs trying to fulfill the aims of the study

sheridan and king-conducted study using procedure like milgrams-pps all students gave real shocks to puppy in response to orders from experimenter
despite real stress of animal, 54% men and 100% women gave what they thought was a fatal shock
effects of milgrams study were genuine because people behaved obeidently even wehn the hsocks were real

Question 7

what was alternative interpretation of findings evaluation points

Answer 7

conclusions about blind obedience may not be justified
haslam-showed milgrams pps obeyed when the experimeter delivered first 3 verbal prods, every pps who was given 4th prod without exception disobeyed
social identity theory-pps in milgrams study only obeyed when they identified with the scientific aims of research, when ordered to blindly obey an authority figure they refused
sit-provide more valid interpretation of milgrams findings, milgram suggested that identifying with the science is a reason for obedience

Question 8

what was the proximity variation of milgrams study

Answer 8

teacher and learner in same room, obedience dropped to 40% from 65%

Question 9

what was the touch proximity variation of milgrams study

Answer 9

teacher had to force learners hand onto electroshock plate if he refused to place it there himself after giving a wrong answer, obedience dropped to 30%

Question 10

what was the remote proximity variation of milgrams study

Answer 10

experimenter left room and gave instructions to teacher by phone, obedience decreased to 20.5%, pps frequently pretended to give shocks

Question 11

what was the explanation for the proximity variation as a whole

Answer 11

decreased proximity-allows people to psychologically distance themselves from consequences of their actions-teacher and learner seperated teacher was less aware of the harm they were causing to another person so they were more obedient

Question 12

what was the location variation of milgrams study

Answer 12

run down office block rather than in yale uni setting baseline of study, obedience fell to 47.5%

Question 13

what was the explanation to the location variation

Answer 13

prestigious uni environment gave study legitimacy and authority, pps more obedient in location because they perceived experimeter shared this legitimact and that obedience was expected, obedience still quite high in office block because pps perceived scientific anture of procedure

Question 14

what was the uniform variation

Answer 14

baseline-grey lab coat as symbol of authority
experimenter was called away because of inconvenient phone call and was replaced with ordinary member of public, obedience dropped to 20%

Question 15

what was the explanation for the uniform variation

Answer 15

uniform encourages obedience-widely recognised symbols of authority, accept that someone in a uniforom is entitled to expect obedience because their authority is legitimate, someone without a uniform has less right to expect our obedience

Question 16

what was the research support situational variables evaluation point

Answer 16

demonstrated influence of situational variables on obedience
field experiment-bickman-three confederates dress in different outfits jacket and tie milkmans outfit and security guards uniform, confederates stood in street and asked passers by to perform tasks such as picking up litter or handing over a coin for parking meter, people twice as likely to obey assistant dressed as security guard than the one dressed in jacket and tie
supports view that situational variables have powerful effect on obedience

Question 17

what was cross cultural replications situational variables evaluation points

Answer 17

findings replicated in other cultures
meeus and raaijmakers used realistic procedure than milgrams study to study obedience in dutchs pps
pps ordered to say stressful things in interview to someone desoerate for a job, 90% pps obeyed
researchers replicated milgrams findings concerning proximity, when person giving orders wasnt present obedience decreased dramatically
findings about obedience arent limited to americans or men but are valid across cultures and pply to women

replications arent very cross cultural
smith and bond-two replications between 1968 and 1985 that took place in india and jordan-both different from us
other countries involved culturally similar to us
may not be appropriate to conclude milgrams findings apply to people in all or most cultures

Question 18

what was low internal validity situational variables evaluation points

Answer 18

pps aware procedure was faked
orne and holland-even more likely in variations because of extra manipulation of variables
unclear whether findings genuinely due to operation of obedience or because pps saw through deception and just play acted-respond to demand characteristics

Question 19

what is the agentic state

Answer 19

person doesnt take responsibility and believe they are acting for someone else-they are an agent

Question 20

what is the autonomous state

Answer 20

free to behave according to their own principles and feels a sense of responsibility for their own actions
shift from autonomy to agency-agentic shift and this occurs when someone perceives someone else as an authority figure- has greater power because they have higher position in social hierarchy

Question 21

what are binding factors

Answer 21

aspects of situation that allow the person to ignore or minimise the damaging effect of their behaviour and reduce the moral strain they are feeling

Question 22

what is the legitimacy of authority

Answer 22

people certain positions hold authority over the rest of us, accept authority figures have to be allowed to exercise social power over others because this allows society to function smoothly, some poeple granted power to punish others, wiling to give ip some independence and to hand control of our behaviour over to people we trust to exercise their authority properly

Question 23

what is destructive authority

Answer 23

powerful leaders use their legitimate powers for destructive purposes ordering people to behave in ways that are cruel and dangerous

Question 24

what is the research support evaluation points (agentic state)

Answer 24

studies support role of agentic state in obedience
milgrams pps resisted giving the shocks at some point and oftne asked experimenter questions about procedure, when told experimenter was responsible the pps went through the procedure quickly with no further objections
once pps perceived they were no longer responsible for their own behaviour they acted more easily as the experimenters agent

Question 25

what is the limited explanation evaluation point (agentic state)

Answer 25

doesnt explain many research findings about obedience
doesnt explain findings of rank and jacobson, found 16 out of 18 nurses disobeyed orders from doctor to administer excessive drug dose to patient, doctor was obvious authority figure, almost all nurses remained autonomous
agentic shift can only account for some situations of obedience

Question 26

what is the cultural differences evaluation points (legitimacy of authority)

Answer 26

useful account of cultural differences in obedience
countries differ the degree to which people obedient
kilham and mann-16% of austrailian women went to 450v but mantell found 85% german pps reached 450v
some cultures authority is more likely to be accepted as legitimate and entitled to demand obedience from individuals
reflects the ways different societies are structured and how children are raised to perceive authority figures

Question 27

what is the cant explain all obedience evaluation points (legitimacy of authority)

Answer 27

cant explain instances of disobedience in hierarchy where legitimacy of authority is clear and accepted
nurses in rank and jacobsons-most disobedient despite working in rigidly hierarchal authority structure
signf minority of milgrams pps disobeyed despite recognising experimenters scientific authority
some people may be more or less obedient than others
possible that innate tendancies to obey or disobey have greater influence on behaviour than legitimacy of an authority figure

Question 28

what is the authoritarian personality and obedience

Answer 28

adorno- authoritarian show extreme respect for authority, view society as weaker than it once was, believe we need strong and powerful leaders to enforce traditional values, show contempt for those of inferior social status, inflexible outlook on the world, uncomfortable with uncertainty, people who are other are responsible for the ills of society, others convenient target for authoritarians who are likely to obey orders from authority figures even when orders are destructive

Question 29

what are the origins of the authoritarian principle

Answer 29

adorno- forms in childhood as result of harsh parenting, parenting style features strict discipline expectation of absolute loyalty impossibly high tandards and severe criticism of perceived failings, parents give conditional love
childhood experiences create resentment and hostility in children, child cant express those feelings directly against parents due to fear of punishment, fears displaced onto others who they perceive to be weaker- scapegoating, hatred towards people who are socially inferior or who belng to other social groups (psychodynamic explanation)

Question 30

what was adornos research

Answer 30

studied more than 2000 muddle class white americans and unconscious attitudes towards other ethnic groups, developed several measurement scales- f scale, eg ‘obedience and respect for authority are the most important virtues for children to learn’ and ‘there is hardly anything lower than a person who does not feel great love gratitude and respect for his parents’
people with authoritarian learnings (scored high on f scale) identified with strong people and were contemptous of the weak, very conscious of status and showed extreme respect deference and servility to those of higher status, found that people had certain cognitive style- no fuzziness between categories of people fixed and distinctive stereotypes about other people and found strong correlation between authoritarianism and prejudice

Question 31

what is the resarch support for authoritarian personalitie

Answer 31

evidence from milgram supporting
milgram and elms interviewed small sample who pp in original obedience and been fully obedient, completed f scale as part of interview, 20 obedient pps scored higher on the f scale than group of 20 disobedient pps
obedient people show similar characteristics to people who have authoritarian personality

when researchers analysed individual subscales of f scale obedient pps had number of characteristics that were unusual for authoritarians
milgrams obedient pps didnt glorify their fathers, didnt experience unusual levels of punishment and didnt have hostile attitudes to their mothers
link between obedience and authoritarianism is complex
obedient pps were unlike authoritarians in so many ways that authoritarianism is unlikely to be useful predictor of obedience

Question 32

what is limited explanation authoritarian personality

Answer 32

cant explain obedient bheaviour in the majority of countrys pop
pre war germany millions of individuals displayed obedient and antisemantic behaviour, despite the fact they must have differed in their personalities
unlikely that they could possess authoritarian personality
majority german people identified with anti emantic nazi state and scapegoated outgroup of jews a social identity theory approach
adornos theory limited because alternative explanation more realistic

Question 33

what is the political bias authoritarian personaliaty evaluation

Answer 33

f scale only measures tendancy towards extreme form of right wing ideology
christie and jahoda f scale is politically biased interpretation of authoritarian pesonality
reality of left wing authoritarianism in shape of russian bolshevism or chinese maoism
right wing and left wing ideologies have alot in common- emphasise importance of complete obedience to political authority
adornos theory not comprehensive dispositional explanation that accounts for obedience to authority across whole political spectrum