8. Explanations of obedience

What are the psychological explanations of obedience?

• Agentic state

• Legitimate authority

According to Milgram what are the 2 levels that individuals can operate on?

• autonomous mode

• Agentic state

Autonomous mode

We feel responsible for our own behaviour and therefore we are likely to act according to law and conscience- we know we are accountable for our actions

Agentic state

When the individual feels able to pass responsibility for their actions onto an authority figure. The individual in this state regards themselves as an ‘agent’ of the authority figure and no longer feels responsible or accountable for their actions. This allows them to act in ways that would not be possible if they were in autonomous mode.

(E.g. soldiers killing innocent civilians because a captain ordered to and not feeling responsible as the captain told them to, so he is responsible)

Legitimate authority

• A person has legitimate authority if they have a role that is defined by society that gives them a right to exert their control over others.

• We may obey these people because we trust them and assume they know what they are doing or because we believe that they have the power to punish us

• Legitimate authority may come from a person’s status in society, may be conveyed by a uniform, or their position in the family structure

• People are socialised to obey legitimate authority

• E.g. the police, parents

Why do we obey legitimate authority?

• socialised to do so through the existence of hierarchies (e.g. at school, the family etc.)- we expect and accept hierarchy from a young age

• As a society we have agreed that the authority is legitimate- we agree that they have earned their authority- e.g. through age, rank, expertise

• We are willing to trust these people to exercise authority appropriately and give up a bit of our independence

• The more we perceive someone to have legitimate authority the more likely we are to shift into Agentic state

Psychological explanations AO3- research into agentic state

P- there is research evidence to support the role of Agentic state in obedience to authority

E- Film evidence and transcripts from Milgram’s original study showed that many participants were reluctant to go on with the procedure but were more willing to do so after they were assured by the researcher that they were not responsible for the outcomes and that the researcher would take full responsibility of anything happened to ‘Mr Wallace’. In subsequent interviews with the participants they said ‘I wouldn’t have done it by myself. I was just doing what I was told’.

E- this evidence demonstrates that the participants had shifted from an autonomous state to an Agentic state thus the participants feel no responsibility for the negative consequences of their actions that the researcher dictated, which enabled them to continue with the procedure. Furthermore there are many examples in history where individuals who have committed atrocities have attempted to blame their actions on the authority figure- e.g. Adolf Eichmann who orchestrated the ‘final solution’

P- This shows that the theory can help to explain real world behaviour

Psychological explanations AO3- useful applications

P- the Research in this area has useful applications

E- the defence of just following orders is not accepted in court, for example Eichmann was convicted of his crimes. Therefore, if we educate people to recognise the dangers of their blind obedience to malevolent authority, and make sure people understand that they will be accountable for their actions, then we may reduce the amount of destructive obedience in society

E- Therefore criticisms of Milgram’s research may be unfounded, for example the suggestion that research can enable people to get away with their behaviour by blaming an authority figure. Milgram is not suggesting this, rather that we all need to be aware that only we are responsible for our behaviour

L- this should reduce blind obedience to authority rather than increase it

Psychological explanations- AO3- legitimate authority research

P- there is evidence from variations of Milgram’s procedure and from other research to support the view that perceptions of legitimacy of the authority figure has an impact on obedience

E- for example when Milgram moved the study to a run-down office, and the experimenter was apparently just a member of the public, obedience dropped to 47.5%, from the 65% found in the original study when the experimenter was working in the prestigious Yale university. The increased perceived legitimate authority of the researcher led to an increase in obedience as they trusted their judgement more and we are socialised to obey those with legitimate authority.

E- additionally, Bickman found that 92% of pedestrians obeyed an order to give a stranger money for a parking meter when the person giving the order was dressed as a security guard, compared to only 49% when he was dressed in ordinary clothing.

L- this shows that when the authority figure has greater status, and therefore more legitimate authority, they are more likely to be obeyed

What are the 3 situational factors which can impact obedience

• Proximity

• Location

• Uniform

Proximity

How close the person is to the consequences of their actions when obeying an authority figure and/or how close they are to the authority figure can impact a person’s obedience

E.g. soldier may be more likely to obey an order to drop a bomb from a place where they cannot see the devastating consequences, compared to shooting the same people when face to face

In Milgram’s Experiment Variation- how did proximity of participant To the consequences of their actions impact obedience?

• the distance between Mr Wallace and the participant influenced the obedience rate- the further away the participant is from Mr Wallace, the more able they are to avoid witnessing the consequences of their actions, and therefore they are more likely to disobey

• Obedience decreased to 40%

In Milgram’s Experiment Variation how did. proximity of participant to experimenter impact obedience?

Obedience decreased when the participant was given instructions from an experimenter over the phone- 20.5%

Pressure to obey the experimenter is lessened if they are not in the same room

How can location impact obedience?

Some locations increase the perceived legitimate authority of the authority figure, increasing obedience

How did location impact obedience in Milgram’s study?

The experimenter in Milgram’s study had a high amount of perceived authority because he was attached to a very prestigious institution (Yale university)- therefore obedience to the authority figure is higher

When Milgram moved his experiment to a seedy downtown office and the experimenter was apparently just a member of the public obedience rate dropped to 48%

How can uniform impact obedience?

A uniform can give a perception of greater authority, therefore we would expect the obedience rate would be higher if the person giving orders was wearing a uniform

Situational factors in obedience AO3- proximity in obedience

P- research evidence to support the role of proximity in obedience

E- Milgram Variation- when teacher and learner in the same room obedience=40%

E- milgram variation- when experimenter left the room and gave orders by telephone, obedience 20.5%

L- having to directly face the consequences of your actions (proximity to learner) or not being directly faced with the authority figure (less proximity to the experimenter) has an effect of reducing obedience

Role of situational factors AO3- location and uniform

P- research evidence to support the roles of both location and uniform in obedience

E- Bickmann- 92% of pedestrians obeyed an order to give a stranger money for a parking meter when the person giving the order was dressed as a security guard, compared to only 49% when he was dressed in ordinary clothes. - uniform leads to increased obedience

E- Milgram Variation- moved his procedure from highly prestigious Yale University to seedy downtown office and experimenter apparently just a member of the public- obedience rate 48%- location plays a role in obedience

L- both of these factors can be linked to the concept of legitimate authority . A uniform or a prestigious location, and the status associated with it, both increases the impression of legitimacy of authority figure and in turn increases obedience

Role of situational factors AO3- fails to consider other factors

P- Research fails to consider other factors which may be important in understanding obedience

E- Mann- replicated Milgram’s original study in Australia- only 16% of participants obeyed up to max voltage of 450V, whereas Mantell showed it was 85% when conducted in Germany

E- this cross-cultural comparison shows that in different societies, children may be socialised differently from a young age to be more or less obedient

L- this suggests that whilst situational factors like uniform and proximity are important, other factors may play a more significant role in obedient behaviour

Dispositional factors which impact obedience

Authoritarian personality

Who first identified the authoritarian personality?

Adorno

Causes of the authoritarian personality

• strict upbringing with emotionally distant parents- high standards and criticism for failing

• Harsh physical punishments for disobedience- instills need in child to obey authority

• This upbringing leads to a high respect for authority which continued into adulthood and becomes part of the personality

• Conditional love- creates hostility and resentment, which cannot be shown towards parents so is repressed and displaced elsewhere- usually towards minority groups

Beliefs and values of those with the authoritarian personality

extreme respect for authority+ hierarchy - believe those in positions of power should be obeyed

• Attempt to control and dominate those that they consider to be beneath them in hierarchy (treat those regarded as societally inferior with hatred) and very obedient to those who they consider to be above them in hierarchy

Behaviour of those with authoritarian personality

• submit to authority

• Readiness to give out orders- particulate to those deemed inferior

• Prejudiced, rigid and tyrannical behaviour

Authoritarian personality AO3- supporting evidence

P- research evidence to support the view that authoritarian personality is linked to higher obedience

E- Zillmer et al- 16 Nazi war criminals scored highly on 3 out of 5 F scale dimensions

E- Elms and Milgram- those that were highly obedient in Milgram’s Experiment scored significantly higher on the F-Scale than less obedient participants

L- both of these studies offer some support for the view that authoritarianism may lead to higher levels of obedience. However, as Zilmer found that only 3 dimensions of the F-scale were relevant- is it the authoritarian personality as a whole ,or a few specific traits that happen to part of this personality type that lead to obedience?

Authoritarian personality AO3- issues with causation

P- there is difficulty establishing a cause and effect link between authoritarian personality and obedience. supporting research is correlational and therefore lacks internal validity

E- e.g. In Elms and Milgram’s study we cannot say that having an authoritarian personality caused higher obedience- may have be an another unaccounted for variable, or variables that were responsible for personality and behaviour

E- in retrospective study (trying to explain a behaviour though something that has happened in the past) it is not possible to establish the direction of the effect. It could be that the authoritarian views of the participants resulted from their experience of being part of the Nazi regime, rather than vice versa

L- highlights the difficulty of establishing a dispositional basis of any behaviour, such as obedience

Authoritarian personality AO3- research bias

P- it is thought that this theory may be subject to research bias

E- assumes authoritarian personality is solely limited to right wing individuals

E- however, in a preliminary study Conway devised a scale to measure authoritarian views in left wing individuals and found parallels with Adorno’s results- suggests left wing individuals are just as likely to display authoritarian traits as right wing individuals- may be just as susceptible to obeying authority as right wing individuals

L- expectations of the researcher may skew out views of personality types that are likely to be associated with obedience- giving us a limited understanding