Social-psychological factors - evaluation

Question 1

It is a useful account of cultural differences in obedience

Answer 1

• Countries differ in obedience to authority: 16% of Australians went to the top of the voltage scale vs 85% of German Ps did
• Authority is more likely to be accepted as legitimate in some cultures
• depends on how children are raised to perceive authority figures ➢ Supportive findings from research across different cultures increase the validity of the explanation

Question 2

hofling

Answer 2

• Some Ps did not obey
• Also, in Hofling et al’s (1966) study, nurses should have shown anxiety as they gave responsibility over to the doctor, because they understood their role in a destructive process. But this was not the case.
  ➢ Agentic shift can only account for some situations of obedience.

Question 3

Milgrams research - opposes agentic state

Answer 3

power of legitimate authority e.g. scientist/researcher higher level in the social hierarchy due to education
- Ppts in agentic state = ppt agreed to continue after the researcher said he was responsible
- However ⅓ ppt resisted the authority and refused to deliver the 450 volts
- If agentic shift was true = then all people would have gone to 450 volts

Question 4

It has research support
- Blass and Schmidt (2001)

Answer 4

• showed students a film of Milgram’s study and asked them to identify who was responsible for harm to the learner
• Students blamed the experimenter rather than the P

Question 5

It can explain real-life obedience

Answer 5

• Kelman and Hamilton (1989) suggest the My Lai massacre is explained by the power hierarchy of the US Army
• Soldiers assume orders given by the hierarchy to be legal; even orders to kill, rape and destroy villages
  ➢ This can explain why destructive obedience is committed