obedience: situational explanations

• agentic state (AS)

  • acting on behalf of another person
  • Milgram proposed that obedience to destructive authority occurs because a person becomes an 'agent', someone who acts for or in place of another
  • in an agent state a person feels no personal responsibility for their actions
• autonomous state (AS)

  • not an agent
  • 'autonomy' = means to be independent or free
  • so a person in an autonomous state behaves according to their principles and feels responsible for their actions
• agentic shift (AS)

  • moving to agentic state
  • the shift from autonomy to being an 'agent' is called the agent shift
  • Milgram suggested that this occurs when we perceive someone else as an authority figure - this person has power because of their position in a social hierarchy
• binding factors (AS)

  • reduce 'moral strain'
  • binding factors are aspects of a situation that allow the person to ignore or minimise the damaging effect of their behaviour and reduce the 'moral strain' they feel
  • Milgram proposed a number of strategies the individual uses, such as shifting the responsibility to the victim or denying the damage they are doing to victims
• strength = agentic state explanation has research support (AS)

  • most of Milgram's pps asked the experimenter 'who is responsible if the learner is harmed?'
  • when the experimenter replied 'I'm responsible' the pps went through the procedure quickly without objecting
  • this shows pps acted more easily as an agent when they believed they were not responsible for their behaviour
• limitation = agentic shift doesn't explain many research findings (AS)

  • Rank and Jacobsen = found that most nurses disobeyed a doctor's order to give an excessive drug dose
  • the doctor was an authority figure but the nurses remained autonomous and did not shift into an agentic state (the same is true for some of Milgram's pps)
  • shows that agentic shift can only explain obedience in some situations
• extra evaluation = obedience alibi revisited (AS)

  • Mandel = the men of Battalion 101 did not have direct orders to shoot civilians in a polish town
  • even so, they did perform the massacre, behaving autonomously
  • suggests that the agentic shift is not required for destructive behaviour
• legitimacy of authority (LoA)

  • we obey people further up a social hierarchy
  • most societies are structured hierarchically - people in certain positions hold authority over the rest of us (eg parents, teachers, police officers, nightclub bouncers)
• authorities have legitimacy through society's agreement (LoA)

  • the power that authorities wield is legitimate because it is agreed by society
  • most of us accept that authority figures should exercise social power over others to allow society to function smoothly
• we hand control over to authority figures (LoA)

  • people with legitimate authority have the power to punish others
  • we give up some independence to people we trust to exercise authority properly
  • we learn to accept authority during childhood (eg parents, teachers etc)
• leaders can use powers for destructive purposes (LoA)

  • history has shown that some leaders (eg Hitler/Stalin) use legitimate authority destructively - ordering people to behave in cruel and dangerous ways
• strength = legitimacy can explain cultural differences (LoA)

  • research shows that countries differ in obedience to authority
  • eg = 16% of Australian women obeyed whereas 85% of German pps did
  • shows that authority is more likely seen as legitimate in some cultures, reflecting upbringing
• limitation = legitimacy cannot explain all (dis)obedience (LoA)

  • people may disobey even when they accept the legitimacy of the hierarchical authority structure
  • eg = most of Rank and Jacobson's nurses were disobedient, as were some of Milgram's pps
  • suggest that innate tendencies towards (dis)obedience may be more important than legitimacy of authority
• extra evaluation = real world crimes of obedience (LoA)

  • research shows that some people disobey legitimate authority
  • eg Rank and Jacobsen = the nurses disobeyed a doctor even in a hierarchy
  • BUT = soldiers at My Lai obeyed their commanding officer, maybe he had more power to punish than a doctor
  • => there is some evidence in real-world situations that respect for legitimate authority can lead to destructive obedience