SI - Explanations for obedience

Question 1

Agentic state AO3: What supporting evidence is there from M’s study?

Answer 1

Footage of ps asking who was responsible. Suggests they were in an agentic state which may suggest why 100% went to 300V and 65% went to 450V.

Question 2

Agentic state AO3: What does this theory not account for?

Answer 2

Doesn’t explain why some ps did not obey. 35% did not follow Es instructions. Suggests agentic state can only account for some situations and some ppl.

Question 3

LoA AO3: What supporting evidence is there for this explanation?

Answer 3

Blass and Schmitt - showed ps a video of Ms study and asked them to identify who was responsible.
Blamed E. Suggests obedience was due to LoA.

Question 4

LoA AO3: What does this explanation account for?

Answer 4

Cultural diff.s.
Studies in other countries differ in degree to which ppl are obedient.
Australia - 16% of ps went to 450V

Question 5

LoA AO3: What is a weakness of this explanation?

Answer 5

Cannot explain instances of disobedience in a hierarchy where the LoA is clear and accepted.
E.g. Rank and Jacobson’s study - nurses gave ps higher doses of drugs than doctors suggested despite dr being authority figure.