What is obedience? Lesson 2 – Social Learning Unit 2 – Understanding other people.

Lesson objectives. You will be able to; Understand what is meant by the term obedience. Describe various factors that affect obedience. Describe and evaluate studies on obedience.

A policeman walks up to you and asks you to pick up a piece of litter. Would you do it?

Obedience. Obedience can be defined as; Following an order, instruction or command which is given by a figure of authority.

Why is it important to study obedience? Under normal circumstances following the orders of an authority figure (police, parents) keeps us safe. However history is littered with authority figures giving unreasonable orders with terrible consequences yet people still obey.

Milgram (1963) He wanted to see how far people would obey an unreasonable order. He advertised in a local paper for male volunteers between the ages of years to take part in a study of learning at Yale University. He then selected his participants from the volunteers. When participants arrived at Yale, they were introduced to Mr Wallace, who was a confederate. They were told that they were to be paired with Mr Wallace and that one would play the role of the teacher and the other the learner. They would pick the roles out of a hat (it was fixed so Mr Wallace was the learner). An experimenter (wearing a grey lab coat) took them into a room and strapped Mr Wallace into a chair and placed electrodes on his arms. The teacher was told that Mr Wallace had a mild heart condition. The experimenter and the teacher than went into an adjoining room and the teacher was shown the ‘Shock’ generator. This had a row of switches ranging from 15 volts (slight shock) to 450 volts (XXX). They did not know that the shock generator was fake. The only real shock was when the teacher was given a 45 volt shock to make the whole procedure convincing. The teacher was then told that the procedure for the investigation was to be for him to read out a number of word pairs, which the learner had to remember. If the learner gave an incorrect answer, or did not say anything, the teacher had to shock him with the shock increasing by 15 volts each time. The whole experiment was standardised so that all participants experienced the same procedure allowing for a fair test. The learner got the first few answers correct and then started to make mistakes. At 180 volts, the learner shouted that he couldn’t stand the pain, at 300 volts he banged on the wall and begged them to stop, and at 315 volts, there was silence. Despite this, the teachers still continued to shock the learner as he wasn’t giving then an answer. The participants were seen to sweat, tremble, and bite their lips; 3 participants even had a seizure during the experiment. A lot of them asked the experimenter if he could check to see if Mr Wallace was OK. The experimenter responded with a number of predetermined prods, such as: ‘the experiment requires that you continue’, and: ‘Although the shocks are painful there is no permanent tissue damage.’

Before he started the experiment, he asked some psychiatrists to predict how many people that they thought would administer the 450 volts, and they, like Milgram, predicted around 2%. The actual results were that all participants administered 300 volts, and that 65% delivered 450 volts. When the experiment has ended, by either reaching the final voltage or the participant refusing to continue, they were debriefed. They were introduced again to Mr Wallace and told the real reason for the experiment. They were all assured that their behaviour was normal. He concluded that people will obey a figure of authority, even if it means hurting another person.

Evaluation Suggested that participants new the shocks were real, explaining why they went so far. However their stress reactions and the fact some did stop before the end makes this unlikely. Lacks ecological validity – not a real situation. (Its been repeated several times in different situations with similar results).

Use your study booklet and find the studies by; Hofling et al (1966) Bickman (1974) Read through these studies and answer the following questions; 1.What did Hofling find? 2.What did Bickman find? 3.Were their findings similar? Why? 4.Which one has the most ecological validity? Why?

Reasons for obedience. Socialisation – we are taught from young to obey authority figures so it’s a natural thing for us. Legitimate authority – The experimenter was wearing a lab coat and the university prestige made participants put faith in the parson telling them what to do. Gradual commitment – Its difficult to know where to draw the line. Electric shocks start low, if you shock a person at 150v why not 165v? Buffers – Participants couldn’t see the learner directly just hear them so it shielded them from the consequences. Not feeling responsible – People lose their sense of responsibility for their own actions. Participants were acting on behalf of someone else, they were just doing what they were told. Stopped them from feeling like they would be blames for what they did.

Plenary – True or False. We are more likely to obey someone in a position of authority than a friend. Obedience studies are all conducted in an ethical way. Wearing a uniform makes a person more likely to be obeyed.

Plenary – True or False. We are more likely to obey someone in a position of authority than a friend. True Obedience studies are all conducted in an ethical way. False Wearing a uniform makes a person more likely to be obeyed. True