What is the difference between situational and dispositional factors of obedience
Situational factors are external influences from the environment that affect obedience.
Dispositional factors are internal characteristics of the person that affect obedience.
What is are the situational factors of obedience
Uniform
Location (e.g. hospital, school)
Legitimate authority
What are the dispositional factors of obedience
Authoritarian personality
Attitudes and beliefs
High score on Adorno’s F-scale
What is Hoffling et al’s experiment (1966)
Aim - to see weather nurses would obey authority figure even if ordered went against hospital rules.
Dr Smith (an unknown doctor) called a nurse during their night shift on their own, from a higher authority.
Experiment in the USA
The nurse was told by the doctor to administer an unknown drug to a patient.
The dosage ordered was double the unsafe limit usually followed, and ordered weren’t usually given over the phone.
The nurses weren’t allowed to discuss with other nurses, had to decide on their own
Findings:
21/22 nurses administered drug dosage.
Very high obedience
Conclusion - People are very likely to obey authority figures, even when it is unsafe or against rules.
Reasons for obedience -
The doctor had legitimate authority.
Nurses entered an agentic state, feeling the doctor was responsible, removing personal responsibility
Summary - Hofling et al. showed that obedience to authority is very high in real-life settings
What did Adorno eat al do and what were the features of the experiment
Adorno carried out a questionnaire where he measured how high people were in the F scale (facist scale, how much of an authoritative personality they have)
According to Adorno, an authoritarian personality includes:
Strong obedience to authority
-Believes authority figures should always be obeyed.
Rigid thinking
-Sees the world as right or wrong, with strict rules.
Hostility towards others
-Dislikes or is aggressive towards people who are different or weaker.
Conventional beliefs
-Strong belief in traditional values and social norms.
Respect for status and power
-Admires people in powerful positions.
Harsh upbringing
-Often linked to strict parenting with high punishment.
—> One-line exam definition:
An authoritarian personality is characterised by rigid thinking, hostility towards outgroups, and strong obedience to authority.
Explain milgrams experiment
How it was carried out:
Volunteers were told they were helping with a learning study.
They had to read out word pairs, if leaner answered incorrectly they were instructed to give them an electric shock
Shocks started at 15v, increasing by 15v each time, with the highest 450v labelled ‘danger’
No real shocks were given leaner just acted in pain.
They were instructed by a scientist to give electric shocks to a “learner” whenever he got answers wrong.
The shocks weren’t real, but the volunteers believed they were.
The learner (an actor) pretended to be in pain and asked to stop, but the scientist told the volunteer to continue.
Findings:
65% went all the way to 450v
100% went to 300v
Many showed signs of stress but still obeyed.
Most participants continued giving shocks, even when they believed the shocks were dangerous.
This showed that people obey authority figures even when the orders go against their own morals
The pressure of an authoritative figure can make ordinary people do harmful actions.
Phrases the authority figure (confederate) used
It is essential you continue
The experiment requires you to continue
I will take full responsibility for any harm caused
What is the fake aim for the experiment given to participant
To discover how punishment can affect memory
What is the real aim of experiment
To discover how obedient ordinary people are when told to harm another person when told by an authority figure
What are factors that effect obedience of participant
If the authority figure left the room the obedience dropped
If participant was instructed to place learners hand on plate to reduce shock, obedience dropped
When all teachers (2 confederates and 1 participant) refused, obedience dropped as others encouraged participant to question authority figure
When learner was placed in same room as participant obedience dropped
What made it believable for participants
Participant watched the learner get strapped into machine
The leaner and teacher roles were pulled randomly (however they were rigged)
The Yale uni setting - prestigious and serious setting made it seem official and increased authority
The learner made noises/cried out in pain and repeatedly asked to stop
The leaner also disclosed that they had heart issues beforehand
After experiment each participant was told the reality of the aim of experiment, and most believed it to be true the entire time
Why could the experiment be criticised
Ethical issues - deception, stress
Lack of ecological validity - (lab setting)
Explain milgrams experiment using uniforms of the guard Milan and civilian
The experiment with a civilian and a guard was carried out by Stanley Milgram.
Explanation (simple):
In one of Milgram’s obedience variations, the experimenter was replaced by a civilian (an ordinary person).
When the authority figure was a guard or official-looking person, obedience was high.
When the authority figure was a civilian with no uniform, obedience dropped sharply
Key point:
This showed that uniform and legitimate authority strongly affect obedience.
One-line exam answer:
Milgram conducted the study showing that obedience decreases when the authority figure is a civilian rather than a uniformed authority.
What is the agentic state?
Seeing yourself as acting for an authority.
Who proposed the agentic state?
Milgram.
What is legitimacy of authority?
Position in a Social Hierarchy
Visible Symbols and Uniforms
Institutional Structure (official setting)
What is the authoritarian personality
personality type prone to obedience.
rigid, black-and-white thinking, extreme obedience to authority, strict conformity to conventional social norms, and aggression toward those who violate these norms
Who proposed authoritarian personality
Adorno et al. (1950)
