Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
SOCIAL INFLUENCE (OBEDIENCE) - Coggle Diagram
SOCIAL INFLUENCE (OBEDIENCE)
LEGITIMACY OF AUTHORITY
if we perceive people to have authority we automatically obey them
factors that prove someones authority
uniform
hierarchal position
respect you have for them (ex. older people)
BICKMAN STUDY
made confederate dress up as either milkman, guard or civilian and make them carry out tasks to see who people conformed to the most
guard was found to make people conform to the most
MILGRAM
uniform obedience - ORIGINAL experiments wearing a lab coat (75% obedience) VARIATION replaced someone with jeans and a t shirt (40% obedience)
40 male volunteers
same sorts of people
low population validity
androcentric
all participants were assigned role of the teacher but they believed it was randomly allocated, confederate learner - both introduced
leaner was strapped to a chair and teacher was placed in another room infant of a shock generator
teacher reading out ABCD set of words, leaner had to choose what was the odd one out
every time learner got it wrong they would get a shock which increases every time
at 150 volts the learner would scream out in pain and say they had a heart condition and wanted to stop
at 300 volts they screamed out then stopped responding
whenever the participants wanted to leave they were given prompts to urge them to continue
tape recording playing - participants weren't told they weren't actually shocking them
FOUND
100% went up to 300 volts
65% continued to 450 volts, even tho they stopped responding
agent state. trying to elevate the moral strain they complete their roll
changed proximity of experimenter - ORIGINAL experimenter was in the room, VARIATION experimenter gave instructions over the phone (conformity reduced to 20%)
changed proximity of confederate - ORIGINAL behind a wall, VARIATION next to them (obedience reduced to 5%)
changed location - ORIGINAL at Yale Uni (prestigious), VARIATION at a run down office building (24% obedience)
A03
participants experienced long term effects
good they debriefed
good location, standardised procedures, controlled
ALTERNATIVE EXPLANATIONS
acknowledging personality might be a better representation, some people might be more naturally obedient
AGENTIC STATE
cognitive approach, more obedient depending on the mental state you're in (autonomous state - believes someone is responsible for their actions, deciding and choosing to act in a certain way)
when people experience moral strain they go through an agent shift - this happens when what they're asked to do goes against their morals, authoritative figure so they struggle to say no causing the agent state ( no longer feel responsible for their actions, acting on behalf of the authoritative figure and the authority is responsible) - become more obedient in that mindset (agentic state)
AO3
participants would show moral strain, symptoms like nerves laughter, sweating, asking who is responsible
difficult to falsify, cant study someones mental state because hard to prove someones mental state
MILGRAM
ignoring the role of personality
SITUATIONAL VARIABLES
environmental explanation
LOCATION
when people are placed in formal locations (office, school, police station) automatically become more obedient
A03
Milgram, orders were said directly behind them but then replicated the study for the orders to be said over the phone which made obedience drop to 20%
A03 - milgram, original experiment taken out in YALE prestigious university, obedience 65%, when changed to a run down office conformity dropped to 24% - shows location does affect level of obedience
PROXIMITY
proximity to the authority figure (closer they are to you the more likely you are to obey them - over the phone less likely - chance of punishment is less the further away they are)
Proximity to the victim, closer you are to the victim the less likely to obey the orders of the authority because you can see the damage
AO3
A03 - Milgram, orders were said directly behind them but then replicated the study for the orders to be said over the phone which made obedience drop to 20%
MILGRAM, replication could see the victim being shocked which lead to only 5% obeying but original put them behind a wall so they couldnt see one another which lead to higher rates of obedience
if we assume obedience is based off of the environment you grew up in, obedience will differ depending on the different views and cultures, situational variables are not the only reason people obey
AUTHORITY OVER PERSONALITY
develop when raised in a strict household, you believe that whatever authority is telling you is for the greater good so therefore obey
EVALUATION
unreliable source of data, not accurate enough (demand characteristics potentially)
cant be universalised and cant be generalised
not everyone will grow up to be obedient, some may go the other way and become disobedient
measured by the F scale - questionnaire, series of statements and scale them strongly agree --> disagree