participants who obeyed to the end of Milgram's studies tended to say that they were just doing what they were told and would not have done it otherwise, showed moral strain
agency theory is the idea that our social system leads to obedience
autonomous state
individuals see themselves as having power, they see their actions as being voluntary
agentic shift
triggered by receiving an order from an authority figure, but, the figure must have legitimate authority and take responsibility
agentic shift involves a shift in responsibility, given to the one doing the ordering
agentic state
individuals act as agents for others, their own consciences are not in control
moral strain
a contradictory urge to obey authroity, signs include physical distress, defence mechanisms include denial
research evidence to support agentic shift
Gupta (1963) studied obedience in India and asked her participants to allocate responsibility, obedient male participants gave 52% responsibility to the experimenter
a weakness of agency theory
reductionist, theory simplifies a complex behaviour of obedience into concepts of mental states which are unfalisfiable
strength of agency theory
Milgram's1963 study, 65% of participants followed orders given by a perceived authority figure and shocked to 450V, supports the idea of the agentic state and shift
issue with Milgram
study lacks credibility, agency theory cannot account for the 35% who did not shock to 450V
alternative theory
charismatic leadership theory, based on leaders personality, considers why people may obey orders from certain authority figures and not other, accounts for the 35% who did not shock
