explanations for obedience

• Legitimacy of authority


  We are more likely to obey people who we perceive to have 'real authority' over us. The authority is legitimate by the individual's position of power within a social hierarchy.
• Legitimacy of authority


  • We are more likely to obey someone if they demonstrate that they have social power – an example of this is through wearing a uniform such as a police uniform
  • We are more likely to obey because we trust and respect them to be well-informed and worthy of the power invested in them
  • We may obey them because they have the power to punish us
• Strengths of the legitimacy of authority explanation

  • Support comes from the variations of Milgram's obedience research. Found participants were more likely to obey a researcher (authority figure) when the research took place in Yale (65%) compared to the run-down office setting (48%) this is positive for the explanation as it suggests we obey more when we perceive the figure of authority as having more legitimate authority and social power
• Weaknesses of the legitimacy of authority explanation

  • Participants still obey in research when the authority figure lacks legitimate authority. Participants still obeyed someone in everyday clothing in Bickman's research and in the everyday setting of a run-down office in Milgram's research. This is an issue as it suggests there must be other reasons for obedience and legitimacy of authority cannot explain all obedience
• Agentic state


  A mental state where you are more likely to obey an order because you see yourself as having no personal responsibility for your behaviour as you are acting for the authority figure
• Agentic shift


  We shift from seeing ourselves as responsible for our own actions to seeing ourselves as an agent carrying out another person's demands. This frees us from the demands from our conscience and allows us to obey a destructive authority figure
• Strengths of the agentic state explanation

  • Support for the explanation comes from Milgram. Before the study, he predicted only 1/1,000 would continue to the maximum of 450V but in the study when faced with an authority figure saying he would take responsibility, 65% of participants continued to 450V representing the agentic state. This is positive for the explanation because it supports the idea that the participants obeyed due to shifting to the agentic state
• Weaknesses of the agentic state explanation

  • Fails to explain individual differences. In Milgram's research, 65% obeyed but many still did not. This is a problem as the explanation may be limited and cannot account for why only some people shift to the agentic state and others do not