Obedience

Question 1

What was the procedure of Milgram (1963)?

Answer 1

• Took place at Yale University, 40 American men volunteered
• The participants (‘Teachers’) gave fake electric shocks to a ‘Learner’ in response to verbal prods from an ‘Experimenter’
• T could hear but not see L, E ordered shocks from 15 to 450 volts

Question 2

What were the findings of Milgram (1963)?

Answer 2

• 100% gave up to 300 volts, 65% continued to 450V while 12.5% stopped there
• Many showed signs of distress/anxiety

Question 3

What conclusions were drawn from Milgram (1963)?

Answer 3

• People are likely to take harmful action against a stranger if ordered to by an authority figure
• No difference between Americans and Germans in that regard

Question 4

What studies give research support for Milgram (1963)?

Answer 4

Research support:
- Beauvois et al. (2012), French documentary presenting as a game show, had the same set up and findings
- Sheridan & King (1972) gave real shocks to a puppy (non-lethal), participants obeyed despite giving real harm

Question 5

What are the weaknesses of Milgram (1963)?

Answer 5

• Low internal validity, participants may have believed the shocks to be fake
• Social identity theory can also explain the results

Question 6

What situational variables affect obedience (according to Milgram)?

Answer 6

Proximity, location and uniform

Question 7

How did proximity affect obedience in Milgram’s variations?

Answer 7

• Teacher and Learner in same room, obedience went from 65% to 40%
• Touch proximity (force hand onto plate), 30% obedience
• Experimenter gives orders by phone, 20.5% obedience

Question 8

How did location affect obedience in Milgram’s variations?

Answer 8

Run down office block instead of Yale University, obedience 65% to 47.5%

Question 9

How did uniform affect obedience in Milgram’s variations?

Answer 9

Experimenter called away and replaced by ‘member of the public’, obedience from 65% to 20%

Question 10

What research supports Milgram’s variations?

Answer 10

• Bickman (1974) field experiment, more obedient when told to pick up litter by security guard than non-uniform
• Meeus & Raaijmakers (1986) told to be stressful to a person who needs a job, 90% obedient but lower when proximity to experimenter lower

Question 11

What are the weaknesses of Milgram’s variations?

Answer 11

• Limited application, only replicated in non-Western cultures twice
• Low internal validity, ‘member of public’ situation contrived -> demand characteristics

Question 12

What is an agentic state?

Answer 12

Acting as an ‘agent’ for someone else, so no personal responsibility felt for your own actions

Question 13

What is an autonomous state?

Answer 13

Feeling free to act according to conscience, have personal responsibility for your actions (autonomous –> agentic is an agentic shift)

Question 14

What are binding factors?

Answer 14

Factors that allow you to ignore/minimise the damage you’re causing as a result of following orders, allowing the agentic state to continue

Question 15

In terms of research, what are the strengths and weaknesses of the agentic state as an explanation for obedience?

Answer 15

• Strength: Milgram’s participants continued when told that the experimenter would be responsible for any harm to the learner
• Weakness: Cannot explain Rank & Jacobson (1977), nurses disobeyed harmful orders from a doctor

Question 16

Explain legitimacy of authority as an explanation for obedience

Answer 16

More likely to obey if authority figure perceived to have power in the current social hierarchy

Question 17

What are the strengths and weaknesses of legitimacy of authority as an explanation for obedience?

Answer 17

• Strength: Explains cultural differences as cultures have differing attitudes towards authority
• Weakness: Can’t explain disobedience within a structured hierarchy, like Rank & Jacobson (1977) (nurses disobeying doctors)

Question 18

What is the authoritarian personality?

Answer 18

• Extreme respect for/submissiveness to authority
• Sees things in black and white, no grey areas, blames minorities for all ills of society

Question 19

What are the origins of an authoritarian personality in a person?

Answer 19

• Harsh parenting, conditional love
• Cannot direct resentment towards parents due to fear of punishment so directs it towards a scapegoat instead

Question 20

What was the procedure and findings of Adorno et al. (1950)?

Answer 20

• Over 2000 middle class white Americans tested using the F-scale to measure authoritarian personality
• Those who scored highly saw things in black and white & had biases/prejudices

Question 21

What are the strengths of the authoritarian personality as an explanation for obedience?

Answer 21

Milgram interviewed his participants, obedient participants scored much higher on the F-scale

Question 22

What are the weaknesses of the authoritarian personality as an explanation for obedience?

Answer 22

• In Milgram’s interviews, obedient participants showed traits unusual for authoritarians
• SIT a more likely explanation for WW2 Germany (not all Germans could have authoritarian personality)
• F-scale only measures right-wing authoritarianism so application is limited