A Building a Rationale Obedience

You may find yourself in situations where you feel you have no other choice than to listen to and obey orders, especially when they are delivered by perceived authority. Humans have been taught to obey orders, since they were children in school, being ordered to line up in a single file, all the way to adulthood, immediately pulling over when a police car signals their sirens and lights. Hence, obedience is a key factor that constantly impacts how humans interact in their everyday life, towards school, work and social situations.

It is the role of psychologists to gather evidence as to what drives us to obey, why we obey and use this insight to allow for long-term progression in society. In social psychology, the concept of obedience is explored through the extent to which an individual, when placed in certain situations, obeys orders & exhibits behavior that they would not condone under normal circumstances.

Milgram's experiments & empirical research on the phenomenon of obedience is considered the ‘turning point' for how human conduct and the implications of obedience are viewed today by not only psychologists, but also the individual and society.

Get quality help now

WriterBelle

Verified writer

Proficient in: Obedience

4.7 (657)

“ Really polite, and a great writer! Task done as described and better, responded to all my questions promptly too! ”

+84 relevant experts are online

Hire writer

In his most famous experiment, study participants were elected as ‘teacher.' The participant is encouraged to administer electric shocks to a 'learner' (covertly a confederate) as punishment for responding incorrectly to a question. The shock level is increased in proportion to the number of incorrect responses made by the learner in a word memory test. The experimenter running the session utilized verbal prompts, like "The experiment requires you to go on", to elicit obedience whenever the participant portrayed signs of uncertainty or reluctance to continue.

It is assumed that a desire for the explanation of Nazi behavior during the Holocaust was a major influence that drove Milgram's interest towards conducting this obedience experiment, and so he devised his study where ‘ordinary' people were given orders to carry out 'aggressive acts' towards another. It is this desire for explanation like Milgram's that has proved the importance of obedience research to psychologists, and to the individual in society. Zimbardo's Stanford Prison experiment is an ample real-life example that sheds light on the influence of group roles and societal norms on obedience towards orders, where participants selected to play the role of ‘guard' kept order in the prison setting by causing emotional distress and physical punishment towards the 'prisoners', assuming this was a justifiable response.

Experimental studies into obedience related to/following onto Milgram's obedience studies were conducted to further investigate the acquiescence present in people's responses to authoritative pressure and use this study to provide accounts for human behavior in the real world. In Dolinski's replication of Milgram's experiment, he followed similar methodology, but instead allowed gender to be a key variable for comparison, and reduced the number of shock buttons for ethical reasons. Though a 50-year contextual difference was present, Dolinski deduced that the majority of participants(90%) pressed the 10th lever; administering the highest shock, and that difference in gender did not produce statistically significant difference in his results. David Mantell also produced a variation of Milgram's experiment, where he separated individuals into two conditions; self-decision and modeling de-legitimization. Mantell's results showed that the participants with more decision-making power assumed more responsibility for their acts, even though they were rational and issued fewer shocks than those in the modeling de-legitimization condition. The core evidence we can take from these studies is that humans under pressure from a authoritative force are more likely to succumb to extreme obedience, to the point where these individuals cant help but obey the most vicious & destructive of authorities.

Works cited

1. Milgram, S. (1963). Behavioral Study of Obedience. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 67(4), 371-378. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0040525
2. Zimbardo, P. G. (1971). The Stanford Prison Experiment: A simulation study of the psychology of imprisonment. Stanford University.
3. Blass, T. (1991). Understanding Behavior in the Milgram Obedience Experiment: The Role of Personality, Situations, and their Interactions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60(3), 398-413. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.60.3.398
4. Burger, J. M. (2009). Replicating Milgram: Would people still obey today? American Psychologist, 64(1), 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0010932
5. Dolinski, D. (2017). Obedience to authority research in the 21st century: Whither Milgram’s paradigm? Journal of Social Issues, 73(1), 126-142. https://doi.org/10.1111/josi.12213
6. Mantell, D. M. (1971). The effects of self-decision and modeling de-legitimization on obedience to authority. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 19(1), 69-74. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0031291
7. Blass, T., & Schmitt, M. (2001). Milgram’s obedience experiments: A meta-analysis. In T. Blass (Ed.), Obedience to authority: Current perspectives on the Milgram paradigm (pp. 193-242). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
8. Gruenfeld, D. H., & Inesi, M. E. (2013). Power and moral decision-making. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 121(1), 69-79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2012.11.002
9. Haslam, S. A., & Reicher, S. D. (2012). Contesting the ‘nature’ of conformity: What Milgram and Zimbardo's studies really show. PLoS Biology, 10(11), e1001426. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.1001426
10. Le Bon, G. (2002). The crowd: A study of the popular mind. Dover Publications. (Original work published 1895)