Others reported amplifying their behaviors to help give the experimenters the results they were looking for. In addition to the long-noted ethical problems with the study, a more recent analysis of the study’s methods has revealed serious issues with the experiment’s design, methods, procedures, and authenticity. During the early 1970s, social psychologist Philip Zimbardo staged an exploration into the study of prisoners and prison life. The study found that obedience rates were only slightly lower than those originally reported by Milgram. He soon discovered, however, that many people are surprisingly obedient to authority.
- Like Milgram’s experiments, Zimbardo’s experiment has not fared well under more recent analysis.
- These variations show that when the humanity of the person being shocked was increased, obedience decreased.
- They were willing to administer electric shocks because the experimenter told them to continue.
- The visibility of the learner is a critical factor in determining the participant’s willingness to administer shocks, rather than the experimenter’s presence.
- They highlight the potential for individuals to follow authority figures even when it leads to harmful actions, emphasizing the need for ethical awareness in hierarchical systems.
When even one person stands up against an unjust order, it can break the spell of conformity and embolden others to resist. But what factors encourage this resistance to authority? We possess the capacity to question, to resist, and to disobey when we believe it’s necessary.
- He did not conclude that people were evil but were influenced by the social context of the situation.
- This concept might seem straightforward, but it’s as multifaceted as a diamond, with each facet reflecting a different aspect of human nature.
- In 2009, researchers partially replicated Milgram’s study, but with a top shock of 150 volts.
- Obedience is important in society because it helps maintain order, but it’s also crucial to think critically about when and why we choose to obey.
- One economics study that compared obedience to a tax authority in the lab versus at home found that participants were much more likely to pay participation tax when confronted in the lab.
- Authority psychology teaches us that people are more likely to obey when they perceive the authority as legitimate.
Obedience to Authority
It often involves actions a person would not have taken unless they were directed to do so by someone of authority or influence. Understanding these can provide insight into both historical events involving obedience to harmful authority and everyday obedience in institutional settings. This reduction in physical presence diminished the authority’s influence. Milgram’s series of obedience experiments in the 1960s provided a profound look into the impact of situational variables on obedience. Individuals tend to trust these figures and believe they have the right to direct others’ behaviour, often leading to obedience.
Zimbardo’s Experiment
How can we better prepare individuals to resist destructive authority? As we wrap up our whirlwind tour of obedience psychology, let’s take a moment to reflect on where we’ve been and where we’re going. It’s about developing the skills to recognize when obedience is appropriate and when it’s time to stand up and say “No.” In education, obedience research has led to discussions about how to balance respect for authority with critical thinking skills.
Reduction In Design Time
Despite the problems with Milgram’s original study, some researchers have been able to replicate his findings. Milgram’s experiments have long been criticized as unethical, but more recent findings have further complicated the legacy of his research. After the horrors of the Holocaust, some people, such as Eichmann, explained their participation in the atrocities by suggesting they were doing as they were commanded. The trial of Adolf Eichmann, who had planned and managed the mass deportation of Jews during World War II, helped spark Milgram’s interest in obedience. Asch’s work had demonstrated that people could easily be swayed to conform to group pressure, but Milgram wanted to see just how far people would be willing to go.
These landmark studies paint a complex picture of human behavior. This study highlighted how professional hierarchies and the perception of authority can override individual judgment and established rules. The Stanford Prison Experiment, conducted by Philip Zimbardo in 1971, took the exploration of obedience and authority to new, disturbing heights.
When participants could see the learner experiencing distress, such as screaming and writhing in pain, their obedience rates decreased. Various factors can influence the degree of obedience, which will be explored further in subsequent discussions. This high level of obedience raised questions about the nature of human behavior under authority. Modifications to the study, such as having the learner in the same room or the experimenter appearing less authoritative, significantly reduced obedience rates.
From Insight to Impact: Our Success Stories
How often do you think the true participant aligned with the confederates’ response? The naïve participant then had to identify aloud the line segment that best matched the target line segment. In Asch’s study, the confederates identified a line segment that was obviously shorter than the target line—a wrong answer. Consider the legitimacy of the authority, the ethical implications of compliance, and your own values and beliefs.
Experimental studies
Now, buckle up, because we’re about to dive into some of the most controversial and influential studies in the obedience psychology definition history of psychology. But it’s not just about individuals. Dominance behavior psychology plays a significant role here. They’re individuals or institutions that we perceive as having legitimate power over us.
The participants did not know that the learners were confederates and that the confederates did not receive shocks. An example of informational social influence may be what to do in an emergency. In Asch’s studies, the participants complied by giving the wrong answers, but privately did not accept that the obviously wrong answers were correct. Table 12.2 summarizes the types of social influence you have learned about in this chapter. When in group settings, we are often influenced by the thoughts, feelings, and behaviors of people around us. For example, when the setting of the experiment was moved to an off-campus office building, the percentage of participants who delivered the highest shock dropped to 48%.
Here’s what students ask on this topic:
Unbeknownst to the participant, the person supposedly receiving the shocks was actually in on the experiment and was merely acting out responses to imaginary shocks. Milgram’s studies involved placing participants in a room and directing them to deliver electrical shocks to a “learner” located in another room. Where obedience relies on direct orders, the perceived status and power of the person giving those orders, conformity is more about fitting in with the group.
Conversely, destructive obedience is the acceptance of requests from an authority that is immoral, illegal, or harmful in some way. Research from 2023 indicates that authority demands sometimes conflict with a person’s values and norms. Explore the definition of obedience in psychology, its characteristics, and how obedience plays out in everyday life. By Kendra Cherry, MSEdKendra Cherry, MS, is a psychosocial rehabilitation specialist, psychology educator, and author of the “Everything Psychology Book.” Helping leaders understand their power in social situations can also help them use it more effectively and responsibly.
Obedience is the psychological process of following explicit instructions or commands from an authority figure, even when those orders conflict with our values, morals, or sense of right and wrong. Learning to obey adult rules is a major part of the socialization process in childhood, and many techniques are used by adults to modify the behavior of children. They found that participants’ tendency to obey authorities was not as important to public opinion polling numbers as religious and moral beliefs.
In other trials, fewer people were willing to go through with the shocks, and in some cases, every participant refused to follow orders. While 65% of the participants followed orders, it is essential to note that the statistics only apply to one study variation. Compliance involves changing your behavior at the request of another person, while conformity consists in altering your behavior to go along with the rest of the group.