Explanations of

Obedience

Agency theory

Description

In order for an authority figure to be obeyed it is important that they are prepared to take responsibility for their order and their subordinate’s actions. Milgram explained that people obey due to the different ways they operate in social situations. When individuals act autonomously they are aware of the consequences of their actions and choose voluntarily to behave in a particular way. In an agentic state the individual sees themselves as an agent for the authority figure and carry out the orders but do not feel personally responsible for the actions they take. People obey because they change from an autonomous state to an agentic state. This is known as the agentic shift.

Evaluation

This explanation is supported by research studies.

Milgram – Milgram’s research showed that when Ps were reminded that they had responsibility for their own actions, very few of them were prepared to obey the authority figure (experimenter) whereas Ps who refused to go on did so if the experimenter said they would take responsibility. This supports the agency theory explanation that people will obey an authority figure when they believe that the authority figure will take responsibility for their consequences of their actions as they are merely acting as an agent.

Hofling et al – supports this explanation as the nurses acted as an agent for ‘Dr Smith’ and believed he would take responsibility for their actions.

Practical applications – Men in the Reserve Police Battalion 101 executed 38000 Jews over a four-year period. Milgram would explain this by saying these police were acting as agents for a more senior authority figure.

Legitimate authority

Description

This explanation states that people obey authority figures because they hold more social power. Most human societies are ordered in a hierarchical way, with some members of the group having legitimate social power to issue instructions to those beneath them in the hierarchy. From early childhood, socialisation within the family and at school teaches us that it is acceptable to obey those who have authority over us. We obey people with legitimate authority because we trust them and because they have the power to punish us if we disobey.

Evaluation

This explanation is supported by three research studies.

Milgram – obedience was much higher when the setting was Yale university (a prestigious academic institution) than when Ps carried out the orders in a run-down office in a seedy district of New York. This shows that the power and authority of the experimenter was diminished by setting the experiment in a less legitimate context.

Hofling et al – supports this explanation as the nurses placed a degree of power and trust in the hospital doctor as they perceived ‘Dr Smith’ to be a legitimate authority.

Authority figures in Hofling’s and Bickman’s study are immediately recognisable by their uniforms and these symbols of authority are enough to produce unquestioning obedience. Those who hold legitimate authority generally have the power to punish (which is another reason why people obey).

Graduated commitment

Description

This explanation refers to the fact that individuals become locked into obedience in small stages. An important reason why people obeyed in Milgram’s study is graduated commitment; at the start of the experiment Ps were asked to give the learner a small shock of 15V. This was increased by 15Veach time the learner made a mistake. Each action for the Ps was a small step beyond the previous action, making it difficult to back out at any time. By committing the Ps in small stages, Milgram established a basis for obedience which made it very difficult for Ps to disobey. This is similar to the ‘foot in the door technique’ (a sales technique) which starts with small requests and gradually increases them.

Evaluation

This explanation is supported by Milgram’s research in obedience (see above).

It is also supported by real life crimes of obedience such as the My Lai massacre and the ethnic cleansing policies in Bosnia and Kosovo in which people were led in gradual stages from the acceptable into the unthinkable (Smith and Mackie, 2003).

Authoritarian personality (Adorno, 1940)

Description

Adorno argued that the key to understanding extreme obedience and racial prejudice lay in early childhood experiences where personality is formed. Whereas other explanations of obedience focus on the situation, Adorno believed that obedience is explained by dispositional factors (i.e. an individual’s personality). He argued that those with an authoritarian personality have a tendency to be extremely obedient. Adorno built on psychodynamic concepts to build on his explanation, arguing that harsh and physical punishment led to the child feeling hostile and angry towards parents. This hostility was uncomfortable for the child and created feelings of conflict, so it might be repressed or locked away into the unconscious mind. The child then displaces these hostile feelings on to others.

Evaluation

Adorno studied over 2000 American students mainly from white, middle-class backgrounds and interviewed them about their political views and their early childhood experiences. Adorno found that people who had been brought up by strict parents who used harsh, physical punishments when they were children often grew up to be very obedient. Under these conditions, children quickly learn to obey and develop a strong respect for authority.

However, Milgram’s research and his explanation of agency theory play down the role of personality and individual differences.

Social InfluenceThe BeauchampCollege