Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM


Top Flashcards (Certified)
All Flashcards

Pychology G > Social Influence : Obedience > Flashcards

Social Influence : Obedience Flashcards

(60 cards)

Start Studying
1
Q

Obedience

A
  • When an individual follows direct orders from a person in authority
  • They have power do punish when obedience doesn’t occur
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

Destructive Obedience

A
  • When an individual obeys an order to do something immoral
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Miligram : Aim

A
  • miligram wanted to know if germans were more obedient to authority
  • find out if ordinary American citizens would obey unjust orders and inflict pain because they were instructed
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Miligram ( procedure ) : how many participants ?

A

40 male volunteers who responded to an advert in a local paper on ‘punishment and learning’

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

Miligram ( procedure ) : what were they told about the experiment in the newspaper ?

A

‘punishment and learning’ task

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

Miligram ( procedure ) : where was it conducted ?

A

Yale University

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Miligram ( procedure ) : who was involved ?

A

teacher (participant) , learner , experimenter

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Miligram ( procedure ) : what did the teacher watch the learner do ?

A

They watched the learner being strapped to a chair and a real sample shock was given

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Miligram ( procedure ) : procedure when experimenter and teacher were in the same room ?

A

Learner recalled word pairs and if wrong answer was given shccks started from 15V to 450V

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Miligram ( procedure ) : are the shocks real ?

A

the shocks weren’t real and the answers were prerecorded

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Miligram ( procedure ) : what happened at 300V,315V and 330V

A 
300V = learner complained about a weak heart 
315V = banged on the wall and demanded to leave 
330V = learner became silent
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Miligram ( procedure ) : what happened if the teacher tried to stop the experiment ?

A

the experimenter gave prods

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

Miligram ( procedure ) : example of prods

A

‘the experimenter requires that you continue’

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

Milgram ( findings) : how many participants continued to 450 volts ?

A

65%

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

Milgram ( findings) : how did participants react ?

A
  • extreme tension

- sweat , stutter

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

Milgram ( findings) : what did 3 participants have ?

A

Full blown uncontrollable seizures

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

Milgram ( findings) : what did the students estimate the results would be ?

A

No more than 3% would go to 450V

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

Conclusions : what would ordinary people do in the right circumstances ?

A

Obey unjust orders

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

Conclusions : are Germans different from others ?

A
  • Germans aren’t different from other people in different countries .
  • if hitler was in a different country it would’ve still happened
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

Miligram evaluation : - ethical

A
  • deception as they were told it’s a punishment and learning task
  • difficult for participants to withdraw because of the prods
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

Miligram evaluation : + le jeu de la mort

A
  • Le jeu de la mort documentary found similar results and 80% when to maximum .
  • this means conditions in milgrams were controlled so it’s repeatable
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q

Miligram evaluation : - lack ecological validity

A
  • tested in a lab setting which is different to real life so conditions are too extreme
  • however Sheridan and king conducted real shocks on puppies dn 54% males/100% woman obeyed.(act same way knowing shows were real)
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
23
Q

Miligram evaluation : - lacks population validity

A
  • he used 40 male participants so results can’t be generalised
  • other populations can be different e.g woman
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
24
Q

Situational

A

Features of the environment that impact the degree to which individuals obey

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
25
Proximity
- Physical closeness or distance of an authority figure | - physical closeness to person carrying out order and ‘victim’
26
Location
Place an order is issued
27
Uniform
Clothes an authority figures wears
28
Milgram variations : proximity
Original = adjoining rooms - teacher and learner in same room = 40 % - teacher forced leaners hand = 30 % - orders over the phone = 20.5 % - closer authority = higher obedience - closer victim = lower obedience
29
Milgram variations : location
Original = Yale - run down office building = 47.5 % - less prestige = lower obedience
30
Milgram variations : uniform
- original = grey lab coat - ordinary member = 20 % - less professional = lower obedience
31
Situational Variables Evaluation : uniform +
- bickmans security guard experiment (people picked up litter) - twice as more likely to listen to security hard than confederate in jacket and tie - supports milgram that uniform conveys authority
32
Situational Variables Evaluation : internal validity -
- individuals figured out procedure was fake due to extra manipulation - lacks internal validity because of demand characteristics - when using a member of the public people acted naturally - please you or crew you effect
33
Situational Variables Evaluation : extraneous variables +
- milgrams investigated each one separately so we can be sure they all impacted obedience - valid
34
Situational Variables Evaluation : insensitive -
- excuse or alibi for behaviour as they may blame authority figure - offensive to survivors of the holocaust suggesting Nazis were victims themselves
35
Social Psychological explanations : legitimacy of authority
- people are more likely to obey those who have power over them - individuals are taught to recognise the value of obedience to maintain stability - authority have power to punish which can also become destructive
36
Example of destructive obedience
Prods in milgrams study
37
Evaluation of legitimacy of authority : Blass and Schmitt +
Milgrams students blamed the ‘experimenter’ because a scientist is seen as an authority figure
38
Evaluation of legitimacy of authority : cultural differences +
- Helps explain cultural differences because obedience varies - Australia = 16% - germans = 85% - in some cultures authority is. Seen. There’s - increases validate
39
Evaluation of legitimacy of authority : milgrams +
- ordinary people = 20%
40
Social psychological explanations : agentic state
Metal state where the individual fells no personal responsibility as they think they’re acting
41
What is the autonomous state ?
Individual feels responsible for own actions so they act according to their own principles
42
What are individuals when they’re acting as an agent ?
Unfeeling puppet
43
What do agents experience when they’re in the agents state ?
- they’re not unfeeling puppets | - they experience moral strain because they know its wrong and they cant do anything
44
How can you reduce moral strain ?
Binding factors
45
Agentic state in milgrams experiment
- The participants were told that the experimenter had responsibility - continued shocks because they felt less responsible
46
Agentic state evaluation : explaining research findings -
- Can’t explain many research findings | - doesn’t explain why some people didn’t obey so agentic state is only for certain situations of obedience
47
Agentic state evaluation : blass and Schmitt +
- students blamed experimenter which shows they shifted to agentic state so they continued the shocks
48
Agentic state evaluation : Nazis -
- behaviour of nazis cannot be explained by authority and agentic state - - germans shot some civilians when direct orders weren’t given and other jobs were offered - their choice
49
Agentic state evaluation : milgrams variation
- another confederate pressed the shocks and obedience rose to 92.5% because responsibility was shifted
50
Agentic state evaluation : judiciary system -
Agentic state suggests actions aren’t controlled by individuals but the judiciary system suggests we have control so should be held responsible
51
Disposition also explanation : authoritarian personality
Certain personalities are associated with higher levels of obedience
52
Authoritarian personality:Adornos investigation
- 2000 middle class white Americans - attitudes toward racial groups - Fscale used
53
Adornos findings : people who scored high on the f scale
Stronger people and they have a hatred for the weak
54
Are authoritarian personalities flexible ?
No
55
Characteristics of authoritarian personality
- obedient to authority - hatred for inferior - traditional attitudes - inflexible
56
Authoritarian personality : origins
- harsh parenting - strict discipline - conditional love - severe criticism
57
Authoritarian personality: What do these experiences create ?
- resentment and hostility in a child | - fears and angers in weaker
58
Authoritarian personality : research support (E) +/-
- those highly obedient on milgrams study scored high on the f scale = more authoritarian - link between authoritarian personality and obedience = increases validity - link is merely a correlation so cannot conclude that authoritarian personality causes obedience (may only be a third factor)
59
Authoritarian personality : methodological problems (E)-
- flawed methodology - every one of the f-scales items is warded in the same direction so people may score high by ticking the same boxes - acquiescence bias
60
Authoritarian personality : limited explanation
- cannot be used to describe behaviour of a majority (country’ - pre war Germany most individuals displayed racism and o s didn’t behaviour despite individual differences so cannot assume they all posses authoritarian personality (many scapegoated. Jews) - may ban alternative more realistic explanation like social identity.

Pychology G (7 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2025 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions