Milgram's study on obedience

Obedience involves complying with direct instructions, typically from someone in a position of authority. A key investigation into this behaviour was conducted by Milgram in 1963, examining how far individuals would go in following orders that could harm others.

Method

• Forty male volunteers were recruited via newspaper adverts for what was presented as a study on learning and memory.
• Each participant was paid to take part and met a confederate who pretended to be another volunteer.
• Roles were assigned through a rigged draw, making the participant the 'teacher' and the confederate the 'learner'.
• The learner was strapped to a chair in an adjacent room and wired to a shock machine visible to the teacher.
• The shock generator had labels from 15 volts ('Slight shock') up to 450 volts ('XXX').
• The teacher read word pairs over an intercom and delivered escalating shocks for incorrect responses.
• At 300 volts, the learner banged on the wall and then fell silent for subsequent shocks.
• If the teacher hesitated, the experimenter, dressed in a grey lab coat, issued prompts to proceed.
• Afterwards, participants were debriefed through discussions, surveys, and a meeting with the unharmed learner.

Results

• 65% (26 individuals) delivered the full 450-volt shock.
• Many paused at 300 volts upon hearing the wall pounding, but continued after prompts.
• Signs of distress were evident, including perspiration, vocal protests, and shaking.

Conclusions

Everyday individuals can follow directives to inflict pain on others, overriding their own moral reservations.

Evaluation

Strengths:

• Ecological validity - The controlled lab environment allowed precise identification of causal relationships.
• Debriefing - Thorough debriefing occurred, with most participants (84%) expressing satisfaction in having taken part.

Limitations:

• Internal validity - Some argue participants suspected the shocks were fake due to demand characteristics, though their anxious behaviours suggested belief in the setup.
• Ecological validity - The artificial scenario lacks resemblance to everyday situations.
• Ethical concerns - Deception was used regarding the study's purpose; withdrawal rights were not clearly stated; prompts pressured continuation despite reluctance; psychological distress occurred without full protection.

Situational factors affecting obedience

Various environmental elements influence the likelihood of obeying authority, as demonstrated in variations of Milgram's original experiment. These factors highlight how context can either encourage or reduce compliance.

Presence of allies

Obedience decreases when others in similar roles refuse to comply. In scenarios with additional 'teachers' who defied orders, participants were more inclined to resist, as support from peers eases opposition to authority.

Proximity of the victim

Compliance was highest (65%) when the learner was in a separate room, dropping to 40% in the same room and 30% when the teacher had to physically press the learner's hand onto the shock device. Closer contact makes the consequences of actions more apparent and difficult to disregard.

Proximity of the authority

When instructions were given remotely via telephone, only 23% administered the maximum shock. Physical absence of the authority figure reduces the pressure to obey.

Location of the experiment

Conducting the study in shabby offices under a fictional firm reduced full obedience to 48%, compared to the original university setting. Environments perceived as less credible undermine the authority's legitimacy.

Agency theory explanation of obedience

Agency theory, developed by Milgram in 1973, proposes that people can shift their sense of responsibility when under authority, explaining why individuals follow harmful orders.

Key concepts in agency theory

Agentic state refers to when individuals act as instruments for an authority, relinquishing personal accountability for their actions. Autonomous state is when people operate independently, making decisions based on their own judgement.

In the agentic state, responsibility is attributed to the authority, allowing compliance without guilt. Participants often sought reassurance that the experimenter would bear responsibility for any harm to the learner, enabling them to proceed.

The agentic shift

The agentic shift refers to the transition from autonomous behaviour to the agentic state, triggered by perceived authority.

Binding factors maintaining the agentic state

• Commitment after receiving payment creates reluctance to abandon the procedure.
• Prestigious settings enhance the authority's perceived validity.
• Persistent directives from the authority reinforce continuation.

The role of legitimacy of authority

Legitimacy of authority stems from societal training to respect and follow those in recognised positions of power, making obedience more likely when authority appears justified.

Sources and effects of legitimate authority

From early life, individuals learn to defer to figures like parents, educators, law enforcement, and medical professionals. Legitimacy arises from established social positions that imply expertise or legal entitlement. Prestigious contexts, such as universities, amplify this perception.

Bickman (1974) field experiment

• Method - Confederates dressed in different outfits (security guard uniform, delivery worker clothes, or smart business wear) asked passers-by to perform tasks like collecting rubbish.
• Results - Compliance was highest with the guard uniform, followed by the business attire, and lowest with the delivery outfit.
• Conclusions - Uniforms symbolising authority increase obedience in real-world settings.
• Evaluation - The natural environment provides high ecological validity, though uncontrolled variables like participant mood could influence outcomes.

The authoritarian personality as an explanation for obedience

The authoritarian personality theory suggests that certain dispositional traits, shaped by upbringing, predispose individuals to unquestioning obedience and related behaviours.

Adorno et al. (1950) theory

Harsh, rigid parenting fosters unquestioning respect for authority and suppressed aggression. Children redirect unexpressed hostility towards those seen as weaker, often targeting minority groups. This personality type emerged from research into prejudices underlying events like the Nazi persecutions.

Characteristics of the authoritarian personality

• Hostility towards those perceived as inferior.
• Uncritical submission to authority.
• Adherence to traditional norms.
• Strict moral views.

The F-scale

The F-scale is a questionnaire created by Adorno et al. (1950) to assess authoritarian tendencies through agreement with statements reflecting these traits.

Elms and Milgram (1966) study

• Method - Participants from Milgram's experiment completed the F-scale.
• Results - Higher scorers tended to deliver stronger shocks.
• Conclusions - Authoritarian traits correlate with greater obedience.

Evaluation of authoritarian personality theory

• It assumes a causal link from strict parenting to obedience, but other influences like schooling could explain both.
• Situational elements often override personality in determining obedience levels.
• It fails to account for widespread obedience in groups where not all members exhibit these traits.