AO1: We have evolved to include the tendency to obey for social order
Agency theory
AO1: autonomous state - your actions are voluntary, you take responsibility for them
Agency theory
AO1: agentic state - relieves you of moral strain, responsibility is shifted to an authorityfigure
Agency theory
AO1: moral strain - distressing emotions felt when going against your own morals
Agency theory
AO1: we act in an agentic state because of the socialisation process, told to obeyauthority from young
Agency theory
AO3: support from Milgram - 65% that obeyed must have been acting in an agentic state where responsiblity was shifted to experimenter
Agency theory
AO3: reductionist - focuses on why we obey and ignore individualdifferences such as an authoritarian personality
Agency theory
AO3: low validity - cant measure or see shift from autonomous state into agentic state
Agency theory
AO3: rwp - can explain why individuals in the Stanford experiment obeyed
Agency theory
AO3: Alternative theory - socialimpact theory which considers different factors that affect obedience levels
Social Impact Theory
AO1: Humans are greatly impacted by others
Social Impact Theory
AO1: Impact is determined by these social forces - strength = age, status, immediacy = proximity, distance, number of sources = number of sources compared to targets
Social Impact Theory
AO1: the greater the SIN, the lesser the impact
Social Impact Theory
AO1: divisionofimpact = the more targets, the less the impact of SIN
Social Impact Theory
AO3: Supporting study - Milgram63, PPs obeyed due to the presence of experimenter in the room, he was also wearing a labcoat (immediacy, strength)
Social Impact Theory
AO3: Supporting study - Milgram 7, drop in obedience to 22.5% because immediacy was low
Social Impact Theory
AO3: Holistic - considers different factors that affect levels of obedience
Social Impact Theory
AO3: Reductionist - doesnt take into account moralstrain, simplifies behaviour when it is more complex