Explanations for Obedience

• agentic state

  • belief someone else will take responsibility for actions
  • Agentic shift: when someone's beliefs move from autonomous (responsib. for self) to agentic

  Agency theory: more likely to obey in agentic state; no belief of suffering conseq.

  > acting on behalf of "agent"
• legitimacy of authority

  • how credible is a fig of authority
  • more likely obey if seen as credible (morally good/right) or legitimate (law abiding)

  E.g.: students

  • more likely listen to parents or teachers than unknown adults
• How can legitimacy of authority explain Milgram's study?

  • experimenter seen as legit; knew he was scientist (e.g.; wore lab coat)

  > more likely to be knowledgeable -> expert authority

  > justified b/c experimenter had highest pos. in social hierarchy
• Milgram's studies provide research support for the agentic state as an explanation for obedience
• Participants were asked questions about the procedure, such as "Who is responsible if Mr. Wallace (the learner) is harmed?"
• The experimenter responded with "I'm responsible," leading participants to go through with the experiment without objections
• This demonstrates a strength of the agentic state theory, indicating that participants acted more easily as the experimenter's "agent" once they knew they wouldn't be responsible for their own actions
• One strength of the agentic state theory is the research support from Milgram's studies, which enhances the validity of the explanation
• One weakness of the agentic state as an explanation of obedience is that it doesn't explain research findings of obedience
• Rank and Jacobson's study found that 16 out of 18 nurses disobeyed orders to administer a lethal Valium dose to a patient
• Despite the doctor being an obvious authority figure, the nurses remained autonomous without experiencing an agentic shift, similar to Milgram's participants
• This weakness of the agentic state as an explanation of obedience is that it is only a partial explanation, as it fails to account for the findings of Rank and Jacobson
• It is a limited explanation as it cannot be applied to all scenarios of obedience
• One strength of the agentic state (AS) explanation is that it has real-world application
• Kilham and Mann used the My Lai Massacre as evidence to support the AS explanation
• The My Lai Massacre can be explained in terms of AS, where soldiers were obeying orders from Generals, shifting responsibility onto the authority figures
• This real-world application is a strength of the agentic state theory because it helps us understand why people obey destructive authority when they believe they won't be held responsible for their harmful actions
• The real-world application of the agentic state theory, such as in the case of the My Lai Massacre, can prevent similar incidents from happening again by providing a greater understanding of human behavior under authority
• One strength of legitimacy of authority is that it is a useful account of cultural differences in obedience
• Countries differ in the extent to which people are obedient
• Kilham and Mann's study showed that only 16% of Australian women went up to 450V in a Milgram-esque study
• In contrast, Mantell (1971) found that this figure was 85% for German participants
• This difference in obedience levels across cultures supports the idea that in some cultures, authority is more likely to be accepted as legitimate and entitled to demand obedience
• Cultural differences in obedience reflect societal structures and how children are raised to perceive authority figures
• Therefore, one strength of legitimacy of authority as an explanation of obedience is that it explains cultural differences by providing insight into how societies are structured and how children are raised based on their acceptance of authority as legitimate
• One weakness of the legitimacy of authority is that it doesn't explain instances of disobedience when the legitimacy of authority is clear
• Nurses in Rank and Jacobson's study were disobedient despite a rigid hierarchy
• A minority in Milgram's study disobeyed despite knowing the experimenter's authority
• This weakness of legitimacy of authority means it cannot explain why some people may be more or less obedient than others
• Innate characteristics have a greater impact than legitimacy of authority in this case
• Therefore, one weakness of legitimacy of authority as an explanation of obedience is that it cannot explain all disobedience, and the theory cannot be generalized