Discuss the authoritarian personality explanations of obedience. (16 marks)
Adorno saw obedience almost as if it was a psychological disorder and tried to locate the
causes of it in the personality of the individuals.
Adorno et al investigated the causes of obedience personality in a study of more than 2000
middle class white Americans and their unconscious attitudes towards other racial groups.
Potential for fascism scale (F scale) were created to measure their level of the authoritarian
personality. They found that people who were identified as having an authoritarian
personality had high scores on the F scales identified with strong people and disliked the
weak. They were conscious of their own and other status showing excessive respect and
deference to those of higher status. Authoritarian people also had fixed distinct stereotypes
about other groups and strong positive correlation between authoritarianism and prejudice.
Adorno concluded those with authoritarian personality are obedient to authority and have
extreme respect for it. They do not appreciate those with lower status and are submissive to
those above them. Adorno also concluded that authoritarian personality is formed in
childhood due to harsh parenting, extreme strict parenting, overly high expectations and
also characterised by conditional love, parents love entirely dependent on how child
behaves.
A strength of the explanation is there is link between authority personality explanation and
obedience. For example, Elms and Milgram interviewed fully obedient participants all who
scored highly on the F scale. Although the results of Elms and Milgram suggest a link
between authoritarian personality and obedience, these results are correctional, and it is
therefore difficult to draw meaningful conclusions about the exact cause of the obedience.
In addition, there are many other situational factors that contribute to obedience, including
proximity, uniform and location. Therefore, although it is likely that authoritarian
personality contributes to obedience, a range of situational variables can affect the level of
this contribution.
A limitation of the explanation is there may be individual differences that contribute to the
development of the authoritarian personality. For example, research by Middendorp and
Meleon (1990) found that less-educated people are more likely to display authoritarian
personality characteristics, than well-educated people. If these claims are correct then it is
possible to conclude that it is not authoritarian personality characteristics that lead to
obedience, but levels of education, which therefore undermines the authoritarian
personality explanation for obedience as other factor may also play an important role.
A limitation of the explanation is that it based on flawed methodology. For example,
Greenstein suggests the F scale is a comedy of methodological errors. For example, items
are worded in the same direction, so the scale just measures to agree the tendency to agree
to everything. Also, researcher knew the participants test scores when they interviewed
them. So, they knew who had authoritarian personality. They also knew the studies
hypothesis, which make bias results likely. This suggesting the data collected is meaningless
and the concept of authoritarian personality lack validity.
Adorno saw obedience almost as if it was a psychological disorder and tried to locate the
causes of it in the personality of the individuals.
Adorno et al investigated the causes of obedience personality in a study of more than 2000
middle class white Americans and their unconscious attitudes towards other racial groups.
Potential for fascism scale (F scale) were created to measure their level of the authoritarian
personality. They found that people who were identified as having an authoritarian
personality had high scores on the F scales identified with strong people and disliked the
weak. They were conscious of their own and other status showing excessive respect and
deference to those of higher status. Authoritarian people also had fixed distinct stereotypes
about other groups and strong positive correlation between authoritarianism and prejudice.
Adorno concluded those with authoritarian personality are obedient to authority and have
extreme respect for it. They do not appreciate those with lower status and are submissive to
those above them. Adorno also concluded that authoritarian personality is formed in
childhood due to harsh parenting, extreme strict parenting, overly high expectations and
also characterised by conditional love, parents love entirely dependent on how child
behaves.
A strength of the explanation is there is link between authority personality explanation and
obedience. For example, Elms and Milgram interviewed fully obedient participants all who
scored highly on the F scale. Although the results of Elms and Milgram suggest a link
between authoritarian personality and obedience, these results are correctional, and it is
therefore difficult to draw meaningful conclusions about the exact cause of the obedience.
In addition, there are many other situational factors that contribute to obedience, including
proximity, uniform and location. Therefore, although it is likely that authoritarian
personality contributes to obedience, a range of situational variables can affect the level of
this contribution.
A limitation of the explanation is there may be individual differences that contribute to the
development of the authoritarian personality. For example, research by Middendorp and
Meleon (1990) found that less-educated people are more likely to display authoritarian
personality characteristics, than well-educated people. If these claims are correct then it is
possible to conclude that it is not authoritarian personality characteristics that lead to
obedience, but levels of education, which therefore undermines the authoritarian
personality explanation for obedience as other factor may also play an important role.
A limitation of the explanation is that it based on flawed methodology. For example,
Greenstein suggests the F scale is a comedy of methodological errors. For example, items
are worded in the same direction, so the scale just measures to agree the tendency to agree
to everything. Also, researcher knew the participants test scores when they interviewed
them. So, they knew who had authoritarian personality. They also knew the studies
hypothesis, which make bias results likely. This suggesting the data collected is meaningless
and the concept of authoritarian personality lack validity.
