A03 Socio-psychological Factors

• Agentic State Support - Socio-psychological Factors A03


  P: Blass & Schmidt (2001) supported idea of legitimate authority.

  E: Showed video of Milgram experiment to students & asked who was to blame for behaviours of 'teachers' & harm to learner

  E: Most believed experimenter to blame rather than teacher or learner (i.e. ppt or confederate).

  L: This responsibility was due to legitimate authority ('experimenter' top of hierarchy) but also to expert authority (he was scientists). The students recognised legitimate authority as the cause of obedience, supporting this agentic state explanation.
• Evaluation of Socio-psychological Factors - A03

  + Support for agentic states (Blass & Schmidt 2001)

  -Dangerous & Insensitive

  +Explain real life war crimes (Kelman & Hamiton 1989)

  +Cultural differences explained (Kilham & Mann 1974 and Mantell 1971)

  -Agentic State not account for Nazi's behaviour (Mantell 1998)

  -Agentic State does not explain many of the research findings (Hofling et al 1966 and Milgram)
• Dangerous & Insensitive - socio-psychological factors A03


  P: Again it could be dangerous & insensitive to accept these factors as a reason for obedience

  E: This theory is often used to explain war crimes like My Lai Massacre & Nazi Death Camps

  E: While it is key to try and understand factors which could make obedience more likely we must show caution.

  L: It is key not to justify & normalise the behaviour of people who conducted such atrocities.
• Explain real life war crimes - socio-psychological factors A03 - PART 1

  P: One strength of these explanations is that they can explain some real life war crimes.

  E: E.G , Kelman & Hamilton (1989) suggested the My Lai Massacre is explained by the power hierarchy of the US army. The army has authority recognised by the US government and the law. Soldiers assume orders given by the hierarchy to be legal - even orders to kill, rape & destroy villages.
• Explain real life war crimes - socio-psychological factors A03 - PART 2


  E: It Calley (only person to be tried) based his defences around claim he was simply following orders. Many people suggested he may have been used as a scapegoat for the real culprits - the US army (power hierarchy)

  L: This shows that It Calley has experienced an agentic shift as he acted as an agent for the hierarchal US army who clearly have legitimacy of authority. The LoA explanation is able to give reasons why destructive obedience is committed.
• Cultural differences explaining - socio-psychological




  P: Legitimacy of authority explanation useful for explaining cultural differences in obedience to authority

  E: E.G, Kilham & Mann 1974 replicated Milgram in Australia found 16% ppt obeyed (top voltage)

  E: Whereas Mantell (1971) in Germany found obedience levels of 85%

  L: Authority more likely be accepted as legitimate in some cultures. This reflects how different cultures view authority, are structured & how children raised to perceive/treat authority figures. Findings from cross-cultural research increase validity of explanation.
• Agentic shift does not explain many research findings - socio-psychological


A03


  P: some ppt did not obey - humans are social animals in social hierarchies and therefore should all obey

  E: Also, in Hoflings et al (1966) nurses should have shown anxiety as they have responsibility over to the doctor coz they understood their role in a destructive process. But this was not the case.

  L: So agentic shit can only account for some situations of obedience.
• Agentic State not account for Nazi's behaviour - socio-psychological


A03


  P: Mantell (1998) described German Reserve Police Battalion 101 - men shot civilians in a small town in Poland (WW2)

  E: They did this even though they were ordered not to (they were told they could be assigned to other duties)

  L: This challenges the agentic state explanation coz the Reserve Police were not powerless to disobey.