social influence - obedience

Question 1

What does obedience mean?

Answer 1

Obedience means to comply with the demands of someone you see as an authority figure

Question 2

What was the aim of Migram’s experiment?

Answer 2

To see if people will obey orders, even those requiring them to harm others.

Question 3

Outline Milgram’s experiment

Answer 3

• 40 American males were recruited to a study at Yale through a newspaper advert. They were told that the study was to do with how punishment affects learning.
• The ‘experimenter’ (a confederate) assigned the participant to the role of ‘teacher’ through a rigged draw, whilst another person (another confederate) was given the role of ‘learner’.
• The learner had to answer questions, and if they gave an incorrect answer, the teacher was told to administer an electric shock.
• The teacher and learner were in separate rooms, so could hear each other but not see each other.
• The electric shocks increased in intensity and each time the learner answered incorrectly, the teacher was instructed to give the next highest shock.
• At 300 volts the learner began banging on the wall and protesting, and after 315 he gave no further response. Four ‘prods’ were used to encourage the participant to continue- if they still protested after this, they could withdraw from the study.

Question 4

What was the learner’s reaction at 300V?

Answer 4

At 300 volts the learner began banging on the wall and protesting.

Question 5

What was the learner’s reaction at over 315V?

Answer 5

At 315 volts the learner gave no further response.

Question 6

What were the prods given by the experimenter in Milgram’s experiment?

Answer 6

Prod 1: please continue.
Prod 2: the experiment requires you to continue.
Prod 3: It is absolutely essential that you continue.
Prod 4: you have no other choice but to continue.

Question 7

What was the range of volts given to the learner?

Answer 7

15-450 volts

Question 8

What were the findings of the Milgram experiment?

Answer 8

65% of participants went to the maximum (450 volt) shock. None stopped before 300 volts. Many showed signs of tension and anxiety, for example sweating, shaking, and nervously laughing, but the majority continued to the end.

Question 9

Evaluate Migram’s original experiment - Nurses

Answer 9

There is findings from further studies that support Milgram’s conclusions.

Hofling et al (1966) - Nurses were told over the phone by a ‘doctor’ to give twice the advised dosage of a made-up drug to patients- 21 out of 22 obeyed (95%), supporting Milgram’s findings that people are obedient and strengthening the external validity of the findings.

However, Rank and Jacobsen (1975): same set up as Hofling, but the drug was familiar (Valium) and the nurses could consult with others- this time, only 2 out of 18 obeyed (11%).

Question 10

Evaluate Milgram’s original study - ethical

Answer 10

There was no real right to withdraw- the ‘prods’ kept the participants from withdrawing.

Participants experienced severe stress and psychological harm, thinking that they had potentially killed someone.

Question 11

Outline the location variation of Milgram’s experiment

Answer 11

The experiment was moved from the prestigious Yale University to a run-down office block.
Obedience fell to 47.5%, because the lack of prestige of the location made it seem less important to obey.

Question 12

Outline the uniform variation of Milgram’s experiment

Answer 12

In the uniform variation, the experimenter was called away and replaced by an ‘ordinary member of the public’, meaning they were not wearing the ‘uniform’ of a grey lab coat.
The obedience rate dropped to the lowest of all the variations to 20%

Question 13

Outline the proximity variation of Milgram’s experiment

Answer 13

Milgram varied his experiment so that the teacher and learner were in the same room. Obedience dropped to 40%, because the teacher could see the consequences of their actions. In another variation, the experimenter was not in the same room, instead giving orders by phone. In this variation, obedience dropped to 20.5%, as the teacher did not feel the pressure to obey. Some even lied to the experimenter in this condition, claiming they were giving stronger shocks than what they actually were.

Question 14

Evaluate Milgram’s original experiment - gender bias

Answer 14

Milgram only studied men in his original experiment. Generalising the findings to women is an example of beta bias, as women may not respond to authority in the same way as men.

Question 15

Evaluate Milgram’s uniform variation - Bickman

Answer 15

Bickman (1974) supports the influence of uniform. Passers-by were asked to perform actions (e.g. picking up litter) by a confederate dressed as a security guard, milkman, or just in a jacket and tie. They found people were twice as likely to obey the security guard compared to the other two confederates.
This supports the idea of uniform increasing obedience and that a situational variable can have a powerful effect on obedience levels.

Question 16

Evaluate Milgram’s research - cross-cultural

Answer 16

Another strength of Milgram’s research is that his findings have been replicated in studies with other cultures
Meeus and Raaijmakers (1968) studied obedience in Dutch participants, participants were instructed to say stressful things in an interview to someone who was desperate for a job (and who was a confederate)
90% obeyed
However, Smith and Bond (1998) showed that replications of Milgram’s research were not very multi-cultural, and were only able to identify 2 replications that were conducted in non-western countries

Question 17

Evaluate Milgram’s uniform variation - low internal validity

Answer 17

One limitation of Milgram’s research is that participants may have known it was a fake situation, especially in the uniform variation when the experimenter was called away and replaced by a passer-by wearing casual clothes.
It could be participants displayed demand characteristics and did what they thought they needed to in order to please the experimenter, especially as they were being paid to take part.
This also reduces the validity of the study.

Question 18

Outline the meaning of ‘agentic state’

Answer 18

Milgram proposed that one reason why people obeyed in his study was due to the ‘agentic state’. This is a psychological condition in which a person does not feel in control of their actions; rather, they are under the control of someone else (an agent for someone else). The opposite to the agentic state is the autonomous state, where people do feel responsible for their actions. Milgram’s participants perhaps underwent an agentic shift, allowing them to blame the authority figure and absolving themselves of responsibility. Milgram also proposed ‘binding factors’ which are used by the participant to justify their actions (for example, the ‘learner’ gave consent to take part, so it’s ok to carry on shocking him).

Question 19

Outline the legitimacy of authority explanation of obedience

Answer 19

This explanation suggests that people will obey someone they perceive to be ‘above’ them in the social hierarchy, and therefore think they have the right to give orders. This is linked with the uniform factor, as a uniform conveys a sense of legitimacy and authority. This authority is ‘rightful’, as it is agreed by society that it is necessary for some people to be able to tell others what to do in some situations.

Question 20

Evaluate the agentic state explanation of obedience - Blass and Schmitt

Answer 20

Blass and Schmitt (2001) asked observers to explain who they thought was responsible for the harm caused to the learner in Milgram’s study. Most though the experimenter was responsible, so supporting the agentic state explanation.

Question 21

Evaluate the legitimacy of authority explanation of obedience - cultural differences

Answer 21

Legitimacy of authority is supported by cultural differences. In countries where obedience to authority is less valued (such as Australia), obedience rates are much lower than in countries that value legitimate authority figures (such as Germany), suggesting legitimacy of authority does play a part in obedience.

Question 22

Outline dispositional explanations of obedience

Answer 22

According to this explanation, obedience happens because of a person’s personality - certain personality types can lead to a person becoming more, or less, obedient.

Adorno developed the ‘F-Scale’ (F standing for ‘fascist’), which measured how authoritarian a person is. He used this in a study of 2000 American participants. He found that a high F-Scale score was linked with excessive respect and deference to those of higher status, and concluded that an ‘authoritarian personality’ is a factor in obedience.

Question 23

Outline the features of an authoritarian personality

Answer 23

The features of an authoritarian personality are:

• Negative towards those they see as ‘beneath’ them and obedient towards those of higher status (or perceived higher status)
• Rigid in their opinions
• Belief in ‘traditional’ values
• Not willing to accept any new ideas or new situations
• Likely to categorise people into ‘us’ and ‘them’ groups, seeing the ‘us’ group as superior

Question 24

Evaluate the authoritarian personality - Milgram

Answer 24

Elms & Milgram interviewed a small sample of Milgram’s original participants who had fully obeyed and found that when participants completed the F-Scale they scored significantly higher than those participants who had disobeyed
This supports Adorno’s view that obedient people have similar authoritarian personalities

Question 25

Evaluate the authoritarian personality - politically bias

Answer 25

It can be argued that the F-Scale is a politically biased, extreme right-wing interpretation of authoritarian personality.
Extreme left-wing personalities can also show high levels of authoritarianism, and it is problematic to suggest people with conservative viewpoints have a psychological disorder.

Question 26

Why would someone develop an authoritarian personality?

Answer 26

Adorno’s research has found that people scoring high on the California F scale had strict authoritarian parents who gave harsh physical punishments.
Adorno suggests the anger for this was displaced onto others, mainly minority groups.

Question 27

Evaluate the authoritarian personality - problems with scale

Answer 27

The original F-scale has all of the questions written in one direction, meaning agreeing to all questions would label someone as authoritarian. Makes the scale very prone to response bias.

Also, some of the factors measured on the F-scale don’t relate to fascism e.g. ‘an exaggerated concern for sexual goings-on’. Lowers validity of the scale.