No tags yet.
What the spec says: Explanations for obedience: agentic state and legitimacy of authority, and situational variables affecting obedience including proximity, location and uniform, as investigated by Milgram.
This isn't in essay format but covers the main explanations and also a study to support each.
Here is the link to my essay on Milgram's main study:
AGENTIC STATE
One reason why people may obey an authority figure is the influence of agentic states. When an individual feels they have complete control they are in an autonomous state - see themselves as responsible for their actions. However, when an individual obeys an authority figure, they enter an agentic state where they no longer see themselves as responsible for the consequences of their actions. Milgram argued that people will, in an obedience situation, pass all responsibility for their actions to the authority figure. This explains why people may be more likely to obey to doing something which is wrong when told by an authority figure because they know it will be the authority figure who takes most of the blame. The shift from an autonomous state to an agentic state is called the agentic shift, causing people to obey where it might be expected that they wont.
The role of the agentic state was supported and shown by Milgram's own experiment in which an authority figure dressed in a white lab coat instructed naive pps to give increasingly large shocks to a confederate learner. The shocks went up to 450V which the pps knew would be painful. 65% of pps still gave the maximum shock and 100% went up to 300V. Milgram suggested this was because the pps knew the authority figure was a scientist and therefore should know what they were doing and be responsible. If any harm was caused to the learner, the pps could say they were only doing what was told to them by the scientist. Thus, they would've entered an agentic state in the experiment supporting this explanation of obedience.
LEGITIMACY OF AUTHORITY
The ability of an individual to get people to obey them is influenced by the legitimacy of their authority. The person giving orders must be perceived to have social power to give orders within the context of the situation to be seen as legitimate. People are socialised from an early age to accept that hierarchy of power exists within society and so are more likely to obey legitimised authority figures recognised by society. A consequence of not obeying may be that they are going against the social norm where there may be a punishment for disobedience. This makes people more likely to obey so as to avoid punishment.
Legitimacy is supported by Milgram's study of obedience. In the study, the pps believed they were following orders given by an authority figure. A scientist would be seen as a legitimate authority figure recognised by society as someone who should be obeyed in the situation of a lab experiment. Thus supporting this as an explanation for obedience.
SITUATIONAL VARIABLES
1. LOCATION
The location where orders are given can affect obedience. This is because the location adds to the legitimacy of the authority figure if it's the place where the authority figure is usually based. They would be more likely to be obeyed due to being seen as having power in that situation.
Milgram's study initially took place in the Yale university lab which would add to the authority of the scientist. However, when Milgram moved the study to a rundown office in town, obedience fell from 65% to 50% of pps who have the maximum shock. This clearly indicates the effects of location on the social power of an authority figure.
2. PROXIMITY
Proximity is also said to affect obedience. When the authority figure is distant from the person, obedience is reduced because the person can no longer face the immediate consequences of disobeying. Proximity to the victim of the obedient act also plays a role in obedience rates. As the person can directly see the consequences of their actions, they may be less likely to obey.
Proximity to the authority figure is supported by a variation of Milgram's study. He gave the first instructions to pps face to face then any further instructions were given over the phone. Obedience rates fell from 65% to 20% showing that obedience was reduced by the distance of the authority figure. In another variation of his study, the learner and teacher were placed in the same room. It was found that obedience fell to 40% as the pps could see the consequences of their actions.
3. UNIFORM
It is expected for authority figures to wear uniforms as symbols of their authority. People therefore automatically obey these figures when they see them in uniform as they've been taught this from an early age.
The authority figure in Milgram's study wore a lab coat which is a uniform for scientists and may have added to his authority. Also, Bickman found evidence to support this. His investigators went out to city streets and told people to do things such as help someone with their shopping bags. The investigators dressed as either a security guard, a milkman or in ordinary clothing. It was found that people were more likely to obey if the investigators were dressed as security guards thus showing the power of uniforms in obedience.
Useful links:
https://www.loopa.co.uk/explanations-for-obedience/
https://www.tutor2u.net/psychology/reference/explanations-for-obedience-variations-of-milgram-1963
https://psychologyhub.co.uk/explanations-for-obedience-agentic-state-and-legitimacy-of-authority/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBYVYrMflwI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B4fyp8-JtDE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jfqAQ-RZDTs