Social-Psychological Factors of Obedience

Question 1

Agentic State

Answer 1

A psychological state where we feel no personal responsibility for our behaviour because we believe ourselves to be acting for an authority figure, acting as their ‘agent’.

Question 2

Autonomous State

Answer 2

When an individual is free to behave according to their own principles and therefore feels a sense of responsibility for their own actions.

Question 3

Agentic Shift

Answer 3

When a person goes from being in an autonomous state to an agentic state. This occurs when a person perceives someone else to be a figure of authority, usually because the other person has more power as a result of their position in the social hierarchy.

Question 4

Binding Factors

Answer 4

Aspects of the situation that allow the person to ignore or minimise the damaging effects of their behaviour and thus reduce the moral strain that they are feeling.

Question 5

What were the binding factors in Milgram (1963)?

Answer 5

The particpants not being able to see the learners that they were ‘harming’, and the prompts given from the researchers.

Question 6

Legitimate Authority

Answer 6

An explanation which suggests we are more likely to obey people who we perceive to have authority over us. This authority is justified by the individual’s position of power within the social hierarchy.

Question 7

Who are some legitimate authority figures?

Answer 7

The experimenter (in Milgram’s research), teachers, police officers, parents, etc.

Question 8

Destructive Authority

Answer 8

When authority figures with legitimate powers use them for destructive powers.

Question 9

Who is an example of a destructive authority figure?

Answer 9

Adolf Hitler

Question 10

Social-Psychological Factors - Strengths

Answer 10

• Supporting evidence from Blass and Schmitt (2001) - students were shown a video of Milgram’s research and identify who was responsible for harm to the learners. They said that the experimenter was most responsible, providing evidence for legitimate authority.
• These factors may prove useful when trying to explain real-life situations, such as the Mai Lai Massacre.

Question 11

Social-Psychological Factors - Limitations

Answer 11

• Contradictory evidence from Hofling et al. (1966) - nurses handed the responsibility over to doctors, showing they did not undergo an agentic shift.
• Contradictory evidence from Mandel (1998) - soldiers were told to shoot civilians, but this was not enforced and they were offered other duties. The soldiers still carried out the order, despite not being in the agentic state.
• Usefulness may be limited by cultural differences - Kilham and Mann (1974) found that 16% of their Australian sample continued to 450 volts, while Mantell (1971) found that 85% of their German sample gave this fatal shock. The way that children are raised in different cultures may affect the way that they perceive authority.
• Testability is limited, requiring artificial lab experiments and artificial tasks.