4b. Evaluation of dispositional variables affecting obedience

What are the strengths of dispositional variables being an explanation for affecting obedience?

Strengths of dispositional variables being an explanation for affecting obedience=

• research support

• flawed evidence

Why is research support a strength of dispositional variables being an explanation for affecting obedience?

Research support is one strength of dispositional variables being an explanation for affecting obedience=

One strength is evidence from Milgram supporting the Authoritarian Personality. Milgram, together with Alan Elms (Elms and Milgram 1966), interviewed a small sample of people who had participated in the original obedience studies and been fully obedient. They all completed the F-scale (and other measures) as part of the interview. These 20 obedient participants scored significantly higher on the overall F-scale than a comparison group of 20 disobedient participants. The two groups were clearly quite different in terms of authoritarianism. This finding supports Adorno et al.’s view that obedient people may well show similar characteristics to people who have an Authoritarian Personality

Why is flawed evidence a strength of dispositional variables being an explanation for affecting obedience?

Flawed evidence is a strength of dispositional variables being an explanation for affecting obedience=

On the positive side, research with the F-scale has provided the basis of an explanation of obedience based on Authoritarian Personality. On the other hand, Fred Greenstein (1969) calls the F-scale ‘a comedy of methodological errors’ because it is a seriously fl awed scale. For instance, it is possible to get a high score just by selecting ‘agree’ answers. This means that anyone with this response bias is assessed as having an Authoritarian Personality.

What are the limitations for dispostional variables being an explanation for affecting obedience?

Limitations for dispositional variables being an explanation for affecting obedience=

• counterargument for research support

• political bias

Why is the counterargument for research support a limitation for dispositional variables being an explanation for affecting obedience?

Counterargument for research support is a limitation for dispositional variables being an explanation for affecting obedience=

However, when the researchers analysed the individual subscales of the F-scale, they found that the obedient participants had a number of characteristics that were unusual for authoritarians. For example, unlike authoritarians, Milgram’s obedient participants generally did not glorify their fathers, did not experience unusual levels of punishment in childhood and did not have particularly hostile attitudes towards their mothers. This means that the link between obedience and authoritarianism is complex. The obedient participants were unlike authoritarians in so many ways that authoritarianism is unlikely to be a useful predictor of obedience

Why is political bias a limitation for dispositional variables being an explanation for affecting obedience?

Political bias is a limitation for dispositional variables being an explanation for affecting obedience=

Another limitation is that the F-scale only measures the tendency towards an extreme form of right-wing ideology. Richard Christie and Marie Jahoda (1954) argued that the F-scale is a politically-biased interpretation of Authoritarian Personality. They point out the reality of left -wing authoritarianism in the shape of Russian Bolshevism or Chinese Maoism. In fact, extreme right-wing and left -wing ideologies have a lot in common. For example they both emphasise the importance of complete obedience to political authority. This means Adorno’s theory is not a comprehensive dispositional explanation that accounts for obedience to authority across the whole political spectrum.