Please enable JavaScript.

Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.

Obedience: Agency Theory & Social Impact Theory - Coggle Diagram

- - - - S - a strength of social impact theory is that there is supporting evidence. For example, variation 17 of Milgram's experiment had 2 rebel peer confederates in the room with the teacher. The real ppt refused to continue, obedience dropped from 65% to 10% showing that individuals impact behaviour as opposed to when alone it supports the divisional effect.
        
        U - The idea of a mathematical formula to calculate social impact is very useful. Latane believes that, if you know the number (N) of people involved and the immediacy (I) of the order and the strength (S) of the authority figure, you can calculate exactly how likely someone is to obey (i) using the formula i= f (SIN). This means you can predict whether laws will be followed, whether riots will break out and whether this class will do their homework.
    - - C - Social impact theory ignores individual differences between each of us, and they view individuals as passive receivers of others' behaviour towards them. However, some of us are passive. Everyone is different, so this theory seems to oversimplify the nature of human behaviour and ignores the individual differences between us.
        
        O - Agency theory explains some things better than social impact theory. For example, in variation 10, obedience was lower in a run-down office block compared to Yale University. Milgram explains this through the prestige of the setting adding to the authority figure's status, but this is hard for Latane to give a mathematical value to. Similarly, Milgram has an explanation for the shaking and weeping his pps engaged in - moral strain. There's no discussion of moral strain in Social Impact Theory, which views people as either obeying to disobeying and nothing in between.
        T - This theory is limited in the type of social situation it is able to explain. It cannot predict what might happen when two equal groups impact each other. For example, in football crowds, where both football teams supporting groups are equal in number, strength and immediacy. The target and source interaction cannot be explained, it is not certain whether the principles of the theory would apply in such cases.
- - - - S - In Milgram's (1963) study pps showed overt signs of moral strain when given an order to seriously harm an innocent person. When he debriefed the pps, many reported that their behaviour was the responsibility of the experimenter, and not that they had not wanted to do it. This provides evidence for the concept of displacement of responsibility.
        U - It can explain real-life events involving obedience to authority, e.g. during the Vietnam War, a small village called My Lai was approached by American soldiers who were ordered to shoot the occupants suspected of being Vietcong soldiers. Lieutenant Calley instructed his division to enter the village and shoot, despite no return of fire. The American soldiers massacred men, women and children in the village that day after being ordered by Calley. In his court martial following the incident, Calley claimed to be just following orders.
    - - C - The theory does not explain individual differences, and why some people obey and some do not. Research evidence has found that disobedience or dissent can occur for many reasons such as personality type, gender differences and situational factors. This means that obedience is a more complex process than is being explained by agency theory.
        O - It does not explain motivated issues behind obedience - French and Raven (1959) identified five bases of power held by individuals in a situation that will determine the amount of obedience shown by the people in the group. These 5 types of power - legitimate, reward, referent, expert and coercive are said to motivate and influence behaviour. These factors may offer a better explanation of obedience and certainly a better explanation for Milgrams finding in his experiment.
        T - The concepts of autonomy and agency are very difficult to define and measure. Agency is a state of mind that, according to Milgram, is switched to when given an order by an authority figure. This concept is an internal mental process that cannot be directly measured, only inferred from the behaviour of an agent.