Situational explanations

• Definition - a mental state where we feel no personal responsibility for our behaviour because we believe ourselves to be acting for an authority figure. This frees us from the demands of our own consciences and allows us to obey even a destructive authority figure.
• Milgram proposed that obedience to destructive authority (harming others) occurs because a person does not take responsibility but instead believe that they are acting for someone else e.g. an agent and feel powerless to disobey.
• Autonomous state - behaving according to your own principles and feel a sense of responsibility for their actions - opposite to agentic state.
• The shift from the autonomous state to an agentic state is called the agentic shift. Milgram says this happens when a person perceives someone else as a figure of authority - higher in the social hierarchy. In most social groups when one person is perceived to be in charge other defer to this person and shifts from autonomy to agency.
• An individual stays in an agentic state due to binding factors - aspects of the situation that allows the person to ignore or minimise the damaging effects of their behaviour. For example, shifting the responsibility to the victim.
• Research support - strength

  Milgram's study supports the agentic state as most of the ppts resisted giving shocks. As the experimenter took responsibility for their actions they acted more easily and no longer blamed themselves for their actions. Furthermore the experimenter was wearing uniform (white lab coat) so it demonstrated legitimate authority as the ppts followed the experimenters orders. BLASS AND SCHMITT showed Milgram's study to students to ask who was responsible for administering the electric shocks and most of the students said that the ppt was at fault.
• Limited explanation - limitation

  Agentic state does not explain many research findings such as RANK AND JACOBSEN (1977) where they found that 16/18 nurses disobeyed doctors' orders to administer a drug dose despite the doctor being an obvious authority figure so almost all the nurses remained autonomous. The agentic state explanation does not account for those who remain autonomous instead of obeying the orders of their superiors.
• Definition - an explanation for obedience which suggests that we are more likely to obey people who we perceive to have authority over us. This authority is justified (legitimate) by the individuals position of power within a society hierarchy.
• Most society exist within a hierarchy where people in certain positions have authority over the rest of us e.g. teachers, police, parents. This is legitimate authority as it is agreed by society and allows society to run smoothly.
• One of the consequences of legitimacy of authority is that some people are granted the power to punish others.
• However legitimate authority can become destructive authority (Hitler).
• Destructive authority was evident in Milgram's study when the experimenter used prods to order participants to behave in ways that went against their conscience.
• Cultural differences - strength

  Countries differ in rates of obedience. KILHAM AND MANN conducted a study on obedience in different cultures and found only 16% of Australian females went to 450v however when MANTELL conducted a similar study on German obedience, they found that 85% of them went up to 450v. This demonstrates that in some cultures authority is more likely to be accepted as legitimate which reflects the different structures of society.
• The 'obedience alibi' - limitation

  MANTELL described a ww2 incident involving German reserve police battalion 101. They shot many civilians in a small polish town, despite no direct orders to go, showing that they behaved in an autonomous state and their behaviour cannot be justified by acting in an agentic state.
• Real life crimes of obedience - strength

  KELMAN AND HAMILTON did some research into the real world crime of obedience (My Lai) compared to RANK AND JACOBSENS study on nurses in the hospital. This can be understood in terms of the power hierarchy of the US army. The commanding officers (COs) operate within a clearer hierarchy than doctors and nurses and have a greater power to punish. If the soldiers did not listen to the orders of their superiors they would receive a much harsher punishment than if a nurse disobeyed a doctor.