Social Influence : Explanations for obedience

Question 1

describe Milgram’s baseline procedure

Answer 1

American male participants gave fake electric shocks to a ‘learner’ in response to instruction (prods) from an ‘experimenter’

Question 2

what were the baseline findings of Milgram’s experiment?

Answer 2

65% gave highest shock of 450v
100% gave shocks up to 300v
many showed signs of anxiety

Question 3

name 3 evaluative points of milgram’s experiment

Answer 3

research support (french tv show) - found 80% gave maximum shock + similar behaviour to Milgram’s participants (Beauvois et al.)

low internal validity - participants realised shocks were fake so ‘play acted’ (Orne & Holland)
supported by Perry - tapes of participants showed only 50% believed shocks were real

Ethical issues - desc meant participants couldn’t consent properly, no right to withdraw

Question 4

what are three situational variables?

Answer 4

proximity
location
uniform

Question 5

describe research into proximity

Answer 5

proximity - obedience 40% with T+L in same room, 30% for touch proximity
(psychological distance affects obedience)

Question 6

describe research into location

Answer 6

obedience 47.5% in run-down office block
university’s prestige gave authority

Question 7

describe research into uniform

Answer 7

obedience 30% when Experimenter was ‘member of the public’
uniform a symbol of legitimate authority

Question 8

name 3 evaluative points into research into situational variables

Answer 8

research support - Bickman’s field experiment
cross-cultural replications - Dutch participants ordered to say stressful things to interviewee
decreased proximity led to decreased obedience (meeus & raajmakers)
low internal validity- some procedures in variations contrived so not genuine obedience (orne and holland)

Question 9

outline ‘agentic state’

Answer 9

acting as an agent of another person
autonomous state - acting freely
shift between the two = agentic shift

Question 10

what are binding factors?

Answer 10

allow individual to ignore the damaging effects of the obedient behaviour, reducing moral strain

Question 11

name 2 evaluative points of research into agentic state

Answer 11

research support - milgram’s resistant participants continued giving shocks when Experimenter took responsibility

limited explanation - cannot explain why Rank and Jacobson’s nurses + some of Milgram’s participants disobeyed

Question 12

outline ‘legitimacy of authority’

Answer 12

created by hierarchical nature of society
some people entitled to expect obedience
learned in childhood

Question 13

name 2 evaluative points of research into legitimacy of authority

Answer 13

explains cultural differences - in australia, 16% obeyed (Kilham and Mann) but 85% in Germany (Mantell), related to structure of society

cannot explain all (dis)obedience - Rank and Jacobson’s nurses in hierarchical structure but didn’t obey legitimate authority

Question 14

how did Adorno et al., describe the authoritarian personality?

Answer 14

an extreme respect for authority and submissive to it

Question 15

what are the origins of the authoritarian personality?

Answer 15

harsh parenting creates hostility that cannot be expressed against parents so is displaced onto scapegoats

Question 16

describe Adorno et al.,s research

Answer 16

used f-scale to study unconscious attitudes towards other racial groups
found that AP’s identity with ‘strong’ people, have fixed cognitive style and hold stereotypes and prejudices

Question 17

name 3 evaluative points of research into the AP

Answer 17

research support - obedient participants had high F-scale scores (Elms and Milgram)

limited explanation - can’t explain obedience across a whole culture (social identity theory is better)

political bias - authoritarianism equated with right-wing ideology, ignore left-wing authoritarianism (christie and jahoda)