Obedience: situational variables

• Situational variables are external factors in the environment that can influence the level of obedience in individuals.

  These include:

  • proximity - physical closeness to the authority figure or the victim
  • location - the setting or place where orders are given
  • uniform - clothing or symbols that convey authority
• Milgram found that when participants were closer to the learner, obedience decreased.

  • Proximity Condition: When the teacher and learner were in the same room, obedience dropped to 40% from 65%.
  • Touch Proximity Condition: When participants had to force the learner’s hand onto a shock plate, obedience dropped further to 30%.
  • Remote Instruction Condition: When the experimenter gave instructions over the phone, obedience fell to 20%, with some participants even pretending to administer shocks.
• Physical closeness to the victim or authority figure influences obedience, as distance allows people to psychologically distance themselves from the consequences or pressure from authority.
• Milgram found that obedience decreased when the location was less prestigious.

  • When the experiment was moved to a run-down office building, obedience dropped to 47.5% compared to 65% when conducted at Yale University.
• The decrease in obedience when the location changed suggests that a more formal or reputable setting, like Yale, increases obedience by reinforcing the authority figure’s legitimacy. In contrast, a less official setting makes the authority appear less legitimate, reducing obedience.
• Milgram found that when the experimenter did not wear a uniform (a lab coat), obedience decreased.

  • The experimenter was replaced by an “ordinary member of the public” (a confederate in plain clothes). Obedience dropped significantly to 20%.
• The decrease in obedience when the experimenter did not wear a uniform indicates that uniforms can increase obedience because they symbolize authority and legitimacy.

  • When the experimenter was dressed in everyday clothes, they were seen as less authoritative, and participants were less likely to follow their instructions.
• A strength is that it is supported by findings from Bickman’s field experiment. In Bickman’s study, researchers dressed as a guard, a milkman, or in plain clothes and asked members of the public to complete tasks, such as picking up litter. Bickman found that people were twice as likely to obey when the researcher wore a guard’s uniform compared to plain clothes, suggesting that uniforms are a symbol of authority, increasing obedience. This supports Milgram’s finding that uniform is a powerful situational variable influencing obedience, as it lends legitimacy and authority.
• A weakness is the potential dangers of situational perspectives. David Mendel (2008) criticized Milgram’s focus on situational factors, arguing it downplays personal responsibility. He suggested that emphasizing external pressures might offer individuals an excuse for immoral behaviour, leaving them with no accountability for their actions. This weakens situational variables as an explanation for obedience as it may allow people to justify harmful actions, by blaming them on external factors rather than their own choices.