Milgram presented an explanation of obedience called legitimacy of authority in 1974
The legitimacy of authority explanation says because we grow up in social hierarchies, we learn from a young age to obey people who are higher up in the social hierarchy.
Problems arise when legitimate authority is used in a negative way...
As shown with Milgram's study
Given the right conditions, people are capable of committing horrible acts when they presume the person giving the order is legitimate, this is called destructive authority
Many real world examples e.g. Hitler, Stalin
Legitimacy of authority is a social explanation for obedience
We are more likely to obey people who we perceive have more authority than us
The authority is justified (or seen as legitimate) due to the individual's position of power within a social hierarchy
Legitimacy of authority is usually taught from a young age - socialisation
Legitimacy of authority can lead to destructive authority
Tarnow (2000) provided support for the power of legitimate authority through a study of aviation accidents, where flight crew actions were a significant factor.
Tarnow found excessive dependence on the captain's authority and expertise.
Eg. one second officer claimed that, although he noticed the captain taking a particularly risky approach, he said nothing as he assumed the captain must know what he's doing.
Such events and recordings offer support for the impact of the presence of a legitimate authority figure and overall increase the credibility of the theory.
What is a limitation of the agentic state and legitimacy of authority explanations?