Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Obedience: Factors Affecting Obedience - Coggle Diagram
Obedience: Factors Affecting Obedience
Situational Factors
Proximity
The closer the authority figure, the higher the level of obedience. The proximity of the victim also acted as a buffer to obedience. However, when the learner was in a different room and could not be seen or heard throughout, this resulted in 100% obedience.
. Example: distance from authority figure seemed to act as a buffer to obedience, as found in the telephonic instruction condition. When the learner was in the same room or the teacher has to physically place the hand of the leader onto a shock pate, obedience dropped.
Status of the Authority
Obedience could only be established when the authority figure was perceived to be legitimate. People are less likely to be obedient when they do not believe the person legitimately has authority over them.
. A high percentage of obedience was found in experiments conducted at Yale University, whereas obedience fell when they moved to a run-down setting or conducted by an ordinary man.
Gradual Commitment
Agreeing to do something gradually, in small steps. Once a person has committed themselves to minor requests; the request gradually increases (i.e. become sucked into giving greater and greater shocks). So, it becomes difficult to refuse escalating requests.
. Example: agreeing to give low-level shocks, which slowly increase in 15volt increments.
Personal Responsibility
Pps are more obedient in a situation where personal responsibility is removed and placed onto the shoulders of an authority figure.
. In a variation study where pps had to sign a contract that stated they were taking part of their own free will and relinquishing any legal responsibility from Yale University, obedience fell to 40%
Personality
2. Empathy
It is believed that people who have high levels of empathy would be less likely to harm another person at the instructions of an authority figure.
. In a replication of Milgram's experiment,
Burger (2009)
found that although people who score high on empathy were more likely to protest against giving electric shocks, this did not translate into lower levels of obedience.
3. Locus of Control
Two different personality types: those with an internal and those with an external locus of control.
.
Internal locus of control
- responsible for their own actions and are less influenced by others.
.
External locus of control
- behaviour is largely beyond their control but to external factors such as fate and they are more influenced by others around them.
Obedient people have an external locus of control; not only are they more likely to be influenced by an authority figure, but they also believe that they are not responsible for their actions. Dissenters, on the other hand, are more resistant to authority and more likely to take personal responsibility for their actions.
The link between personality and obedience seems to account for individual differences in obedience. However, research in this area is mixed, providing only tentative evidence that individuals with an internal locus of control resist and those with an external locus of control are obedient.
1. Authoritarian Personality
The authoritarian personality is most commonly associated with obedience to authority.
Adorno et al. (1950)
put forward the idea that someone with an authoritarian personality is characterised by excessive and blind obedience to authority and a lack of tolerance towards anyone who does not have the same respect for authority figures. They are someone who is likely to submit to the authority of those in a higher position of status or power and, in turn, behave authoritatively towards those of lower status or power.
.
Hyman and Sheatsley (1954)
found that the authoritarian personality is more likely to exist among people who are less educated and of a lower socio-economic status. This is closely related to the developmental approach as it suggests that an authoritarian personality results from our early socialisation - as children, we are raised to have moral values, and understand tolerance and rules of social interactions via punishment and reward systems.
Culture
Individualistic Culture: they behave independently and individual rights are seen as being more important.
. E.g. America or Britain
Collectivist Culture: they do what is best for society as a whole rather themselves. Independence and cooperation are important for the stability of the group.
. E.g. China or India
A collectivist culture is more likely to obey.
Thomas Blass (1999)
conducted a full review of obedience research, analysing research 35 years after Milgram's first series of experiments. His data can be analysed in terms of cultural differences using research employing a similar methodology to Milgram.
. Although some might argue that obedience levels are not universal, on closer inspection of the methodologies of the research studies, it seems that the variation in the percentage of pps who gave the full shock is more a product of the procedure employed than cultural variation.
For example,
Ancona and Pareyson's (1968)
maximum shock level was 330 volts, compared to Milgram's 450 volts. Milgram found 73% obedience in his proximity studies which is more comparable to the 85% found in Italy, suggesting that 330 volts were perceived to be as less dangerous. In Italy, only student pps were used, which Milgram actively avoided because of their obedient nature. A similar comparison can be made of
Burley and McGuiness (1977)
, who used only 20 students and a maximum voltage of 225.
Gender
Milgram
used predominantly male pps in his experiments, although he did conduct one one experiment (Experiment) which involved 40 female teachers. Milgram found that females were virtually identical to males in their level of obedience (65%).
. 27.5% breaking off at the 300-volt level. Yet females' level of anxiety was much higher than males' for those who were obedient. This was also found in
Burger's (2009)
replication of the experiment.
Sheridan and King
(1972) adapted Milgram's experiment to involve a live puppy as a victim that received genuine shocks from college student pps.
. They found that all 13 female pps were much more obedient and delivered the maximum levels of shocks to the puppy compared to men.
Blass (1999)
reviewed 10 studies and found obedience between males and females were consistent across 9 of the studies.
Kilham and Mann (1974)
replicated Milgram's experiment in Australia. They found females to be far less obedient (16%) than male pps (40%).
. Although, this could have been a result of male teachers being paired with male learners and female teachers with female learners.
. Perhaps the females joined together against the situation in an alliance to react against the demands of the aggressive male experimenter.