Definition: following another person's orders. We give in to the commands of someone who is seen as being in authority.

Studies:

1. Milgram (1965-74). He told the participants that the experiment was about the effects of punishment on learning. Participants were required to administer increasingly severe electric shocks to another person whenever he made an error while learning a list of word pairs. The learner was an actor, a "stooge" who received no shocks at all but who behaved as though he had, ing with pain and eventually becoming silent. For the participant there was intense conflict, they became very disturbed, and argued with the experimenter but were told to continue. 65% gave shocks up to the maximum possible level. They found it difficult to disobey by refusing to continue.
The following variations (these are known as the factors influencing obedience) were carried out on the original experiment with the resulting percentage of participants obeying to the end:-
a) In an office building rather than the University -50%
b) Victim in the same room and in sight of participant -40%
c) Experimenter left room and issued instructions by phone -20%

What caused such high levels of obedience?

Although the building and the nearness of the learner were obviously important factors, it seems that they were not the main influences here on the levels of obedience. The main factor seems to be the presence of the experimenter. He would be seen as a person in
authority who was responsible for what was going on and knew what he was doing. The wearing of a uniform or white coat is also a factor – participants are more likely to obey someone wearing a uniform. (Social roles and role expectations are important in determining our behaviour).

Criticisms of these experiments - how true to life is this situation? As the experiments deceived and distressed the participants how ethical were they?

2. Hofling (1966). A nurse was instructed by a phone call from a doctor to give a patient 20mg of a drug. This broke several rules - it exceeded the recommended maximum dose and orders to give drugs should not be taken on the phone from an unknown doctor. 95% did so. Here the role of the doctor is important and the fact that it is a real life situation.

3. Zimbardo (1972). He randomly assigned volunteers to play the parts of warders or prisoners in an experiment and their behaviour was observed. The experiment had to be stopped after six days because their behaviour had undergone very disturbing changes. Guards became ruthless and brutal, forcing prisoners to humiliate themselves and each other and prisoners became more and more passive and depressed. Here it seems that norms of behaviour emerged which influenced the behaviour of the two groups. The subjects became "locked into a role."

All these studies demonstrate the power of roles to influence our behaviour.