SOCIAL INFLUENCE 16 MARKERS
(Social psychological) Explanations for obedience: agentic state and legitimacy of
authority, and situational variables affecting obedience including proximity and
location, as investigated by Milgram, and uniform.
Dispositional explanation for obedience: the Authoritarian Personality.
Explanations of resistance to social influence, including social support and locus of
control.
Minority influence including reference to consistency, commitment, and flexibility
It is the end of the school day and Freddie is pushing other students in the bus queue.
“Stop it, will you?” protests one of Freddie’s classmates.
“You can’t tell me what to do!” laughs Freddie.
At that moment, Freddie turns to see the deputy head, wearing a high-visibility jacket,
staring angrily at him. Without thinking, Freddie stops pushing the other boys and waits
quietly in line.
Discuss the legitimacy of authority and agentic state explanations of obedience. Refer
to Freddie’s behaviour in your answer. [16 marks]
Legitimacy of authority explains that people obey due to society’s hierarchical structure. This
structure means that we give up our independence to people that we perceive are higher up
in society, such as the deputy head, and obey their orders. This explains why some people,
such as the police, have the power to punish us. Legitimacy of authority can be enhanced
by certain visual symbols, such as uniform, which show higher status of authority and
increase our likelihood of obeying. The deputy head has enhanced his legitimacy of
authority, as he is wearing a high-visibility jacket which indicates a level of authority over the
students. The agentic state occurs when we give up our responsibility, acting in the place of
someone else. When we are given an order by someone that we perceive to have authority
over us, as they are higher in the social hierarchy, we go through an agentic state. This
means that we transition from an autonomous state, where we feel responsible for our
actions, to an agentic state. Binding factors cause us to remain in this agentic state, as it
minimises the guilt we feel for our behaviours when obeying authority. Freddie does not
obey his classmates when they ask him to ‘stop it’, as they are not above Freddie in the
social hierarchy, however he is likely to stop his behaviour when the deputy head arrives
because he has a higher status.
A strength of the legitimacy of authority explanation is that it has supporting research.
Psychologists showed students a film of Milgram’s shocked study, asking them who they felt
was responsible for the harm to the learner. The students recognised that the authority
figure was the cause of obedience, which supports this legitimacy of authority explanation.
This strengthens the explanation of obedience because it provides a real life example of the
explanation which gives it higher levels of external validity.
Another strength of the explanation is that it can explain cultural differences. A study in
Australia replicated Milgram’s study and found that low levels of participants obeyed
throughout the entire study. Another study in Germany found there were high levels of
obedience during a replication of Milgram’s shock study. This demonstrates that authority is
likely to be accepted as legitimate in some cultures, more than others, reflecting the ways
societies are structured and how children are raised to perceive authority.
A weakness of this explanation is that it is a limited explanation for obedience. The agentic
shift explanation predicted in a nurse study that if the nurses handed over the responsibility
to the doctor, they should have shown similar levels of anxiety as the participants in
, SOCIAL INFLUENCE 16 MARKERS
Milgram’s study, due to their role in a destructive process. This demonstrates that agentic
shift can only account for some situations of obedience, which limits its explanatory power.
Discuss legitimacy of authority as an explanation for obedience [8 marks]
Legitimacy of authority explains that people obey due to society’s hierarchical structure. This
structure means that we give up our independence to people that we perceive are higher up
in society, and obey their orders. This explains why some people, such as the police, have
the power to punish us. Legitimacy of authority can be enhanced by certain visual symbols,
such as uniform, which show higher status of authority and increase our likelihood of
obeying. In one of Milgram’s shock study variations, the teacher switched from wearing a
white lab coat to ordinary clothes, acting as a member of the public. This decreased levels
of obedience to only 20%, which shows that uniform has an impact on legitimacy of
authority.
A strength of this explanation of obedience is that it can explain cross-cultural variations.
Milgram’s shock study was replicated in Australia, where it was found that obedience levels
were much lower. In Germany, where the study was also replicated, obedience was found
to be much higher. Legitimacy of authority accounts for the fact that societies have different
structures, therefore some people from one culture are more likely to obey than someone in
another. This strengthens legitimacy of authority as the explanation can be used to show
cross cultural differences in view of authority.
Another strength of the explanation is that it has high external validity. Supporting evidence
showed that students also see legitimacy of authority. In a study, students were asked to
watch a film of Milgram’s shock study, and were then asked who they thought was
responsible for the shocks given. The majority of the students agreed that the teacher was
at fault, which strengthens the legitimacy of authority explanation as they recognise the
teacher had authority, so this was the cause of obedience and the learner was not
responsible.
Outline research into the effect of situational variables on obedience and discuss what
this tells us about why people obey. [16 marks]
There are a number of situational variables that have been shown to impact levels of
obedience, including proximity and uniform. In most of Milgram’s shock study variations, the
experimenter wore a white lab coat. Milgram examined the significance of uniform by calling
the experimenter away at the start of the experiment and replacing hum with an ‘ordinary
member of the public’ in normal clothes. This caused a drop in obedience from 65% to 20%,
which demonstrated the dramatic importance of uniform as peoples were less likely to obey
when they don’t perceive the authority figure as a legitimate source of authority.
There is supporting research that strengthens the role of uniform as a situational factor
affecting obedience. Another psychologist had three confederates dress up in different
outfits: a jacket and tie, a milkman uniform and a security guard uniform. They all asked
passers by in the street to do small tasks such as picking up litter. People were twice as
likely to obey the security guard than the jacket and tie. This supports the fact that uniform
conveys authority and is more likely to produce obedience.
A weakness of research into uniform affecting obedience is that many believed that the
extra manipulation of variables caused the participants to work out the aims of the study.
This means that there may have been demand characteristics from participants who
behaved differently to suit the aims of the research. This is a weakness because we cannot
be sure that the variation affected obedience or if the findings were due to participant
reactivity.
(Social psychological) Explanations for obedience: agentic state and legitimacy of
authority, and situational variables affecting obedience including proximity and
location, as investigated by Milgram, and uniform.
Dispositional explanation for obedience: the Authoritarian Personality.
Explanations of resistance to social influence, including social support and locus of
control.
Minority influence including reference to consistency, commitment, and flexibility
It is the end of the school day and Freddie is pushing other students in the bus queue.
“Stop it, will you?” protests one of Freddie’s classmates.
“You can’t tell me what to do!” laughs Freddie.
At that moment, Freddie turns to see the deputy head, wearing a high-visibility jacket,
staring angrily at him. Without thinking, Freddie stops pushing the other boys and waits
quietly in line.
Discuss the legitimacy of authority and agentic state explanations of obedience. Refer
to Freddie’s behaviour in your answer. [16 marks]
Legitimacy of authority explains that people obey due to society’s hierarchical structure. This
structure means that we give up our independence to people that we perceive are higher up
in society, such as the deputy head, and obey their orders. This explains why some people,
such as the police, have the power to punish us. Legitimacy of authority can be enhanced
by certain visual symbols, such as uniform, which show higher status of authority and
increase our likelihood of obeying. The deputy head has enhanced his legitimacy of
authority, as he is wearing a high-visibility jacket which indicates a level of authority over the
students. The agentic state occurs when we give up our responsibility, acting in the place of
someone else. When we are given an order by someone that we perceive to have authority
over us, as they are higher in the social hierarchy, we go through an agentic state. This
means that we transition from an autonomous state, where we feel responsible for our
actions, to an agentic state. Binding factors cause us to remain in this agentic state, as it
minimises the guilt we feel for our behaviours when obeying authority. Freddie does not
obey his classmates when they ask him to ‘stop it’, as they are not above Freddie in the
social hierarchy, however he is likely to stop his behaviour when the deputy head arrives
because he has a higher status.
A strength of the legitimacy of authority explanation is that it has supporting research.
Psychologists showed students a film of Milgram’s shocked study, asking them who they felt
was responsible for the harm to the learner. The students recognised that the authority
figure was the cause of obedience, which supports this legitimacy of authority explanation.
This strengthens the explanation of obedience because it provides a real life example of the
explanation which gives it higher levels of external validity.
Another strength of the explanation is that it can explain cultural differences. A study in
Australia replicated Milgram’s study and found that low levels of participants obeyed
throughout the entire study. Another study in Germany found there were high levels of
obedience during a replication of Milgram’s shock study. This demonstrates that authority is
likely to be accepted as legitimate in some cultures, more than others, reflecting the ways
societies are structured and how children are raised to perceive authority.
A weakness of this explanation is that it is a limited explanation for obedience. The agentic
shift explanation predicted in a nurse study that if the nurses handed over the responsibility
to the doctor, they should have shown similar levels of anxiety as the participants in
, SOCIAL INFLUENCE 16 MARKERS
Milgram’s study, due to their role in a destructive process. This demonstrates that agentic
shift can only account for some situations of obedience, which limits its explanatory power.
Discuss legitimacy of authority as an explanation for obedience [8 marks]
Legitimacy of authority explains that people obey due to society’s hierarchical structure. This
structure means that we give up our independence to people that we perceive are higher up
in society, and obey their orders. This explains why some people, such as the police, have
the power to punish us. Legitimacy of authority can be enhanced by certain visual symbols,
such as uniform, which show higher status of authority and increase our likelihood of
obeying. In one of Milgram’s shock study variations, the teacher switched from wearing a
white lab coat to ordinary clothes, acting as a member of the public. This decreased levels
of obedience to only 20%, which shows that uniform has an impact on legitimacy of
authority.
A strength of this explanation of obedience is that it can explain cross-cultural variations.
Milgram’s shock study was replicated in Australia, where it was found that obedience levels
were much lower. In Germany, where the study was also replicated, obedience was found
to be much higher. Legitimacy of authority accounts for the fact that societies have different
structures, therefore some people from one culture are more likely to obey than someone in
another. This strengthens legitimacy of authority as the explanation can be used to show
cross cultural differences in view of authority.
Another strength of the explanation is that it has high external validity. Supporting evidence
showed that students also see legitimacy of authority. In a study, students were asked to
watch a film of Milgram’s shock study, and were then asked who they thought was
responsible for the shocks given. The majority of the students agreed that the teacher was
at fault, which strengthens the legitimacy of authority explanation as they recognise the
teacher had authority, so this was the cause of obedience and the learner was not
responsible.
Outline research into the effect of situational variables on obedience and discuss what
this tells us about why people obey. [16 marks]
There are a number of situational variables that have been shown to impact levels of
obedience, including proximity and uniform. In most of Milgram’s shock study variations, the
experimenter wore a white lab coat. Milgram examined the significance of uniform by calling
the experimenter away at the start of the experiment and replacing hum with an ‘ordinary
member of the public’ in normal clothes. This caused a drop in obedience from 65% to 20%,
which demonstrated the dramatic importance of uniform as peoples were less likely to obey
when they don’t perceive the authority figure as a legitimate source of authority.
There is supporting research that strengthens the role of uniform as a situational factor
affecting obedience. Another psychologist had three confederates dress up in different
outfits: a jacket and tie, a milkman uniform and a security guard uniform. They all asked
passers by in the street to do small tasks such as picking up litter. People were twice as
likely to obey the security guard than the jacket and tie. This supports the fact that uniform
conveys authority and is more likely to produce obedience.
A weakness of research into uniform affecting obedience is that many believed that the
extra manipulation of variables caused the participants to work out the aims of the study.
This means that there may have been demand characteristics from participants who
behaved differently to suit the aims of the research. This is a weakness because we cannot
be sure that the variation affected obedience or if the findings were due to participant
reactivity.
