Social Influence - Obedience

definition of obedience

wher an individual acts accordingly to the orders of an authority figure. they might do something they would not normally do

what was the aim of milgrams study

investigate whether a normal person would give someone potentially lethal electric shocks if told to do so by an authority figure

what was the method of milgrams study

• 40 American men ages 20-50 volunteered in study at Yale for money

• Ps told it was about memory

• Role of teacher/learner was ‘randomly allocated’ but was actually fixed

• Experimenter wore white lab coat

• Learner wired up & teacher moved to separate room and had to give shocks when learner got a Q wrong

• Shocks went up to 450V, no further response after 315

• Teacher would be told to continue by experimenter when they look for reassurance

what were the findings of milgrams study

• 12.5% of Ps stopped at 300V

• 65% Ps went to 450V

• 3 Ps had seizures due to distress, many others were sweating, stuttering and biting lips

• Prior to study Yale psych students predicted 3% would go to 450V

• 84% of Ps said they were glad to have participated in follow up questionnaire

What is the conclusion for milgrams

People are willing to obey orders even when they might harm another person which shows how strong obedience is

AO3 of milgram

1. Study has many ethical issues. Ps could not give informed consent as they were deceived about true aim of study or that the electric shocks weren’t real. There was also a lack of right to withdraw as Ps were told to keep going. The Ps were not protected from harm as they experienced extreme distress. Milgram argued the ethical issues were necessary for Ps to behave realistically.

2. The sample is gender biased. the sample consisted of all males so the findings cant be applied to women. there is evidence shows women are more obedient. a study showed 45% of men obeyed to 450V on a puppy whereas 100% of women. This means that the findings can’t be generalised

3. There is evidence that the Ps did think the study was real. 75% of Ps in post interview study said they believed it was real. The extreme physical reaction of many of the Ps shows they believed it. This increases the validity of the study

What are the 3 situational variables of obedience

1. Proximity

2. Location

3. Uniform

Define situational variables of obedience

Features in the immediate physical and social environment which may influence a personal behaviour

Describe the situation variable of obedience of proximity

• teacher and learner in same room, obedience dropped from 65% to 40%

• Touch proximity - teacher had to force learners hand onto electroshock plate, obedience dropped 65% to 30%

• Remote instruction - experimenter gave instruction by phone, obedience dropped 65% to 20.5%

• Decreased proximity allows people to psychologically distance themselves from the consequences of their actions

Describe the situation variable of obedience of location

• the place the order is issues and the status associated with it

• Variations in dodgy, run down office dropped 65% to 47%

• Then done in Yale uni, obedience was high

• The prestigious environment in the baseline experiment gave Milgrams study legitimacy and authority.

• Ps are more obedient as they perceive that the experimenter shared this legitimacy and that obedience is affected

Describe the situation variable of obedience of uniform

• outfits are symbolic with their authority which indicates that we are expected to be obedient

• Experimenter called away for ‘inconvenient phone call’ at start of procedure so confederate in normal clothes took over, obedience dropped 65% to 20%

• Uniforms encourage obedience as they are widely recognised symbols of authority

• We are more obedient to someone in a uniform as their authority is legitimate and someone without uniform can’t expect our obedience

What are the two social psychological variable of obedience

1. Agency theory

2. Legitimacy of authority

What is agency theory

Explains obedience in terms of whether an individual is making their own free choice or acting as an agent for an authority figure

Define agentic state

The way an individual may obey an order as they hand over responsibility for the outcome of the action to the authority figure

• the individual feels they are acting as an agent and don’t feel responsible

• An agent may feel highly anxious and experience moral strain but feel powerless to disobey

Define autonomous state

Individuals are seen as personally responsible for their actions

Define agentic shift

Shift from autonomous to agentic state that occurs when a person perceives someone else as an authority figure as they are higher in the social hierarchy

Define binding factors

Aspects of a situation that the person to ignore or minimise the damaging effects of their behaviour and reduce moral strain

AO3 of agency theory

1. agentic state has research support. study showed students a video of milgrams study and asked them to identify who was responsible for the harm to the learner. students blamed experimenter due to them having legitimate authority which students though was the cause of obedience

2. agentic state doesn’t explain all of the findings. some Ps didn’t obey in Milgrams. humans are in a social hierarchy so should obey. in a study, 16/18 nurses did not obey an authority figure so remained autonomous. suggests agentic state can only account for some situations

3. agency theory does not explain all bad behaviour. in WW2 a german army shot civilians in polish town despite not being directly ordered to. this challenges the explanation as the soldiers weren’t powerless to disobey

define legitimacy of authority

an explanation of obedience that suggests we are more likely to obey people who we perceive to have authority over us.

• this authority is justified by the individuals position in the social hierarchy

describe legitimacy of authority

• most societies are structured in a hierarchal way

• most authority is legitimate as its agreed by society. we learn acceptance of legitimate authority during childhood

• we accept that authority figures have to be allowed to exercise social power over us

• some are given power to punish others which is a consequence of legitimacy of authority

• we are willing to give certain people control of our behaviour as we trust them to exercise their authority correctly

define destructive authority

people using their authority in negative way

AO3 of legitimacy of authority

1. useful account of cultural differences in obedience. study found 16% of australians went to the top voltage whereas 85% of germans. authority is more likely to be accepted in certain cultures which reflects how different societies are structured. findings from cross cultural research increases validity

2. can explain real life obedience. study suggested the My Lai massacre is explained by the power hierarchy of the US army. soldiers assume orders given by authority figures to be legal. therefore we understand reasons as the why destructive obedience is committed

3. doesn’t explain all obedience. rank & jacobson did study where 16/18 nurses were disobedient despite power hierarchy. Also many Ps in milgrams study didn’t go to 450V. suggests some people are just less obedient which indicates there are other influential factors

what is the dispositional explanation of obedience

adornos authoritarian personailty

what is the authoritarian personality

a type of personality that is susceptible to obeying people in authority. they are submissive to those of higher status and dismissive of inferiors

what are the characteristics of an authoritarian personality

• belief in absolute obedience

• highly conventional attitudes towards sex, race and gender

• belief that society is weaker than it was before

how does an authoritarian personality originate

• forms in childhood due to harsh parenting involving strict discipline, expectations of absolute loyalty, impossibly high standards

• based on conditional love depending on how child behaves

• creates resentment and hostility in the child but they feel unable to express feelings in fear of retaliation

what is scapegoating

feelings of anger taken out on someone they deem to be weak.

this explains the dislike for people that are socially inferior

what is the aim of adnornos study

investigate causes of A.P

what was the method of adornos theory

• 2000 middle class white americans

• used the F scale to measure each individuals degree of AP

• used 30 Qs assessing 9 personality dimensions

what were the findings of adornos study

• high score on the F scale identified with strong people and disregarded to weak people

• conscious of their own status, showing excessive respect and submission

• strong correlation between AP and prejudice

AO3 of dispositional explanations of obedience

1. the AP explanation is based on a flawed methodology. every item of the F scale is worded in the same direction so the questionnaire just measures the tendency to agree meaning you can get a high score by selecting agree answers suggesting anyone with this response bias is assessed as having an AP

2. the AP explanation is based on correlational data. adorno measured many variables and significant correlations between them eg he found a relationship between harsh parenting and AP. however this doesnt mean that one causes the other. the variables may be linked by a third factor that hasnt been identified. therfore adorno cant claim that harsh parenting caused the development of an AP.

3. the AP explanation is limited. millions of germans displayed obedient, racist and anti semitic behaviour but didnt have same personality. the explanation cant explan obedient behaviour in the majority of the countrys population as they must have differed in all sorts of ways. therefore social identity theory seems more likely where the germans identified with the Nazis and adopted their views

define minority influence

a form of social influence where a minority of people persuades the majority to adopt their beliefs, attitudes and behaviours

what are the factors of minority influence

1. consistency

2. commitment

3. flexibility

how is minority influence achieved

through conversion where majority becomes gradually won over to a minority viewpoint

describe the minority influence factor of consistency

• shows the minority are commited and creates enough doubt about existing norms to get people to reexamine

• synchronic consistency: agreement between people in minority group

• diachronic consistency: consistent over time makes people think about their report

describe the minority influence factor of commitment

• sometimes minorities engage in extreme activities to draw attention to their views and shows their dedication to the cause

• leads to the majority paying attention

• called the augmentation principle

describe the minority influence factor of flexibility

• consistency can come across negitively and be seen as rigid and stubborn which makes it unlikely a conversion will occur

• minority needs to adapt their point and accept reasonable and valid counter arguments

who studied the minority influence factor of flexibility

nemeth

describe nemeths study

• groups of 3 Ps and 1 confederate had to decide how much compensation the victim of a ski accident should get

• when confederate argued for low amount and refused to change = no effect on majority

• when confederate was flexible and went higher, majority changed opinion to theirs

• shows how minorites need to be persuasive and question importance of consistency

what is the minority influence process of change

1. 3 factors make people start thinking about the topic

2. they think about it which leads to deeper processing

3. people switch from majority to minority as they have converted

4. the more this happens, the faster the rate of conversion (snowball effect)

5. minority view then becomes majority view

who investigated the factor of consistency on a minority influence

moscovici

what was the aim of moscovivis study

investigate the role of a consistent minority on the opinions of a majority in an unambiguous situation

what was the method of moscovicis study

• 32 groups of 6 (all female)

• 4 real Ps and 2 confederates

• ps told it was study about perception

• each group shown 36 blue slides

• in consistent condition, confederates answered wrong and said they were green every time

• inconsistent condition: confederates said 24 were green and 12 were blue

• answers given verbally infront of group

what were the findings of moscovicis study

• consistent con: 8.2% agreement w minority

• inconsistent con: 1.25% agreement w minority

• control group: no confederates, Ps got it wrong 0.25% of time

what was the conclusion of moscovicis study

shows that although minority influence is relatively small, consistency is the important variable

AO3 of moscovici’s study

1. the task was artificial. we dont perform tasks like identifying colours in everyday life. study dont in a lab. doesnt reflect minority influence in the real world

2. there was a sample bias. all Ps were female. research shows women are more conforming than men. therefore there is low validity in the study as the results cant be generalised to male minority influence

3. there are ethical issues in the study. the Ps were decieved about the true aim of the study as they were told it was about perception. this means that the Ps could not give informed consent.