situational variables of obedience Flashcards
proximity, location and uniform
what are situational factors?
features of an environment that affect individuals’ level of compliance to authority figures.
Define proximity as a situational factor of obedience.
The physical distance individuals are from the consequences of being obedient.
The greater the distance, the less the awareness of the consequences.
Outline Milgram’s proximity variation study.
In baseline study, the teacher and learner could not see each other, in this variation, they were placed in the same room. Obedience dropped from the original 65% to 40%.
In the touch proximity variation, the teacher had to physically force the learners hand onto a shock plate if the learner refused to do so himself after a wrong answer. Obedience dropped down further to 30%.
Define location as a situational factor of obedience.
Can add or subtract from the legitimacy of an authority figure. Obedience is higher in locations that add legitimacy or authority of a figure, such as an institutionalised setting.
Outline Milgram’s location variation study.
Milgram conducted one variation in a run-down office block rather than in the prestigious Yale university setting of the baseline study. In this location, obedience dropped to 47.5%. Suggests Milgram may have got high obedience rates due to Yale university being a high status institution.
Define uniform as a situational factor of obedience.
Uniforms increase obedience because they are widely recognised as symbols of authority. We accept that someone in a uniform is entitled to expect obedience because their authority is legitimate. Individuals are socialised to obey people in uniforms.
Outline Milgram’s uniform variation study.
In the baseline study, the experimenter wore a grey lab coat to give perception of legitimacy of authority. In one variation, the experimenter was called away for an inconvenient phone call at the start of the procedure. The role was taken over by a ‘member of the public’ (a confederate) in everyday clothes rather than a lab coat - obedience rates dropped to 20%, lowest of the variations.
Outline research by Bickman (1974) as support for uniform as a situational variable affecting obedience.
In a field experiment in NYC, Bickman (1974) had three confederates dress in three different ways - jacket and tie, a milkman’s outfit, and a security guards uniform. They individually stood in the street and asked pedestrians to perform tasks such as picking up litter, handing a coin for a parking meter.
He found that people are three times more likely to obey an order given by the confederate dressed as a guard than a civilian - guard = 89%, civilian = 33%.
supports view that situational variables, such as uniform, do have an effect on obedience.
Evaluate the research by Bickman (1974) as support for situation variables affecting obedience.
Lacked control of extraneous variables due to it being a field experiment, with variables such as noise, crowding, weather etc. The opportunity sample may also have been an issue as people could have been in a hurry or depressed and absent minded - so may nit be representative of everyone. Limits the validity of the study and the support it can give.
The study was conducted in one city of one country, therefore the conclusions drawn are culturally biased and cannot be generalised.
Outline low internal validity as a limitation of research into situational variables affecting obedience.
Orne and Holland (1966) argued that in Milgram’s baseline study ptps behaved as they did because they didn’t really believe in the set-up, that they weren’t really fooled and were ‘play-acting’.
Therefore in all of his findings it is unclear whether findings are genuinely down to the operation of obedience or that they saw through the deception (demand characteristics) - limits support his findings can give due to low internal validity.
