Describe Milgram’s agency theory of obedience (5)



Describe Milgram’s agency theory of obedience (5)construct a concise précis of the theoryillustrate your description with an example from real life or researchMilgram used the term ‘agentic state’ to explain the high levels of obedience in his famous experiments where 65% of Pps followed orders to administer electric shocks to another supposed participant up to 450 V.Milgram explained that people make the agentic shift when confronted with a person they perceive as having legitimate authority and begin to act as an ‘agent’, on behalf of the authority figure.He goes onto say that when people in the agentic state believe that the authority figure is responsible for their actions; this is known as diffusion of responsibility. He says that when not in the presence of an authority figure people are in the autonomous state, they behave independently and feel responsible for the consequences of their behaviour, making decisions according to their own freewill.Milgram says that because people will often commits acts of destructive obedience when in the agentic state, (i.e. harming another person - an act they would not normally do), they may experience moral strain and shows signs of psychological and physical anxiety as their behaviour conflicts with their beliefs about right and wrong.Milgram says the agentic shift is reinforced in early childhood, when parents reward children for obedience and punish them for defiance; this is part of the socialisation process, which continues further when children learn to obey teachers at school. He also explained that obedience can be seen as having survival value and that natural selection favoured those creatures who fitted into the social hierarchy and avoided confrontation. He explains that the state evolved as a way of maintaining social harmony - sticking to the rules is important for the good of the group.Evaluate Milgram’ agency theory of obedience (6)notice that the mark allocation is less than 8and so it will be point markedyou do not have to put description in this question and if you do it will not be credited - you will be wasting your time.your answer should focus on strengths and weaknesses of agency theoryyou should include research evidence in your answeryou should also include comments about whether or not agency theory is able to explain real world eventsyou may compare agency theory with another explanation of obedience such as Authoritarian personality theory and show how agency theory is either a better or worse theory.Below I have modelled a range of strengths and weaknesses based on research, applications and alternative theories but you would clearly not need to write all of this to get the marks.One strength of this theory is that is supported by a fairly reliable raft of research evidence. For example, Milgram found that obedience decreased in certain situations for example when the plight of the learner was made more apparent (e.g. when they were in the same room as the learner and had to hold his hand in position); agency theory would predict this as participants would be more likely to revert to the autonomous state as they were unable to ignore the consequences of their actions since the physical and psychological distance between them was eliminated. They began to feel more responsible for their actions. Similarly when the legitimacy of the experimenter’s authority was reduced by the study happening in a less prestigious setting, obedience also went down and this too can be explained as participants are less likely to make the agentic shift when the source of the authority is more ambiguous. A further strength of this theory is that it has been applied in the real world and used to help people to resist destructive obedience in the face of potentially malevolent authority figures and also as a defence in the courtroom to demonstrate to the jury the power of the social situation in compelling people to do things that are against their own will. For example in a South African courtroom, 9 defendants were saved from the death penalty in a case where someone was murdered as a result of mob action. Whether one agrees with the outcome or not, this is strength of the theory as it allowed people to take a different perspective on the idea of freewill and determinism as regards the power of social circumstances. The theory appears in many business and ethics textbooks as a reminder of the importance of being aware of the consequences of one’s actions and remaining alert to one’s own power to resist orders. It has also been helpful in explaining atrocities such as those committed by American solider against the Iraqi prisoner in Abu Ghraib jail and psychologists such as Zimbardo represented these soldiers explaining that their actions were not evoil but the result of an evil tyrannical regime in the prison. One weakness of agency theory is that it could be said to be unfalsifiable meaning that it is difficult for the findings of cross cultural research to refute the theory. For example, the theory would suggest that we should expect differing levels of obedience across different cultures since some cultures may be more permissive and may reward children for being independent and making their own choices, whereas other cultures may be more authoritarian and expect children to adhere more rigidly to strict rules. The theory would suggest that the more permissive culture should have lower obedience and that cultural differences will therefore be observed. If such differences were not observed and all cultures appeared in fact rather similar (despite differing child rearing practices) the theory would also predict this outcome, since it says that obedience has survival value and thus obedience will be a probably outcome in all cultures. This shows that Milgram; theory is not scientific as it is arguably not falsifiable.Another weakness is that the theory does not explain effectively why certain authority figures command higher levels obedience than others. For example 900 people committed suicide by drinking poison when ordered to do so by cult leader Jim Jones, however he did not have any real legitimate authority as Milgram suggests is necessary to make the agentic shift. Other theories of obedience such as Social Power Theory (French and Raven, 1959) are better placed to explain this type of phenomena as the theory recognises that power need not be legitimate, it can also come from expert knowledge or charisma (referent power).Furthermore, the theory does not effectively explain why some people find it easier to resist obedience than others. For example 35% of the original sample of 40 men dropped out of the study before reaching 450V and agency theory has little to say about the shift back to the autonomous state. Theories that look at individual differences such as Authoritarian personality theory explains these variations more effectively by saying that our level of obedience is shaped by our experiences in infancy relating to a harsh style of upbringing which creates feelings of aggression and hostility towards the parents which cannot be expressed due to fear. Some people may have more repressed aggression and Adorno would argue they are more likely to commit brutal acts in the name of obedience than those who have experienced warm and permissive caregiving. Since this theory is better able to explain some of the research data, this weakens the validity of Milgram’s agency theory as a comprehensive explanation of obedience.Support for the importance of life experiences as a determinant of obedience/defiance can be found in the analysis of qualitative data from the transcripts of the post study interviews with Milgram; for example Gretchen Brandt, who dropped out at 150 V, had grown up in Nazi Germany and stated “Some of us have seen too much pain” as her reasons for switching back to the autonomous state.Evaluate Milgram’ agency theory of obedience (8)notice that the mark allocation is 8and so it will be band marked and the examiner will be expecting to see thorough and accurate AO1 as well as AO3.It is imperative that you try and strike a balance between AO1 and AO3 and your success in doing this will dictated by how strict you are with your timings - 4-5 mins on AO1and then switch to strengths and weaknesses.you should include research evidence, applications and an alternative theory if possibleyou need to develop your chains of reason with care and ensure your answer is coherent – this is why proof reading is essential!You need to introduce competing arguments, alternative viewpoints where ever you have time, (one the one hand this, on the other hand that)It is essential that you draw a conclusion at the end of any response that is 8 marks or over.I have attempted to write an answer, under timed conditions; 8 minutes allowing myself 1 minute to plan and 2 minute to proof read (11 mins altogether).Milgram explained how people make the agentic shift when they perceive that someone has legitimate authority. They move from the autonomous state where they behave independently and make their own decisions about how to behave based on their sense of right and wrong, to the agentic state, where they act on behalf of the authority figure and absolve themselves of responsibility. They may commit acts of destructive obedience that they did not think they were capable of and this can create moral strain where they experience symptoms of anxiety as their actions are in conflict with their beliefs about right and wrong. Milgram thought that we are so obedient as we are socialised into making the agentic shift from infancy as we are rewarded by parents, and later by teachers, for obedience. He also thought obedience had evolved and natural selection would have favoured humans who avoided confrontation by doing as they were told in order to preserve social harmony. One strength of theory is that it is supported by Milgram’s own study and the variations; when he decreased the legitimacy of the authority figure for example by doing the study in the run down office building and also by having the ordinary man give orders, obedience decreased as predicted, (48% and 10% respectively). Also, when people were forced to take greater responsibility for their actions due to being in the same room as the learner, obedience also dropped. Some people would argue that this evidence counts for little though as the study lacks ecological validity and the behaviour is not like a real life situation as the task of being shocks to some-one was outside the normal cope of the Pps experience, however Hofling’s study (1966) refutes this claim as in this study nurses were unaware that they were being observed in their workplace yet still 95% followed orders to give a unlicensed drug to a patient on the ward and this shows that Milgram’s theory actually predicts real life well. Similarly, the theory has been able to explain various real world events. For example, Zimbardo argued that the soldiers who committed atrocities against the Iraqi prisoners in Abu Ghraib were in the agentic state and they were not evil personalities. This said, Milgram’s theory does not explain very well why some people are actually defiant when faced with authority. For example 35% dropped out of his study as did one nurse in the Hofling study. Other psychologists, such as Adorno, say that obedience is better accounted for by individual differences for example in how we were brought up and by the life experiences we have had. For example Gretchen Brandt, one of Milgram Pps, said “some of us have seen too much pain” in her post study interview. She used to explain why she dropped out. She had grown up in Nazi Germany. In conclusion, whilst agency theory accounts well for the very high levels of obedience seen in many studies and real world events, the theory is not scientific as its more descriptive than explanatory. For example saying it says we are obedient when we are in the agentic state and basically defines agentic state as the state of obeying order; this is known as a circular argument. Also, agency theory does not explain why some people can switch back from agency to autonomy with greater ease than others and this is a major problem with the theory as fostering this could stop acts of destructive obedience.Describe social impact theory in relation to obedience (5)Culture and obedience Indian study Gupta (p.20) ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download