• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

Obedience means acting in response to a direct order, usually from an authority figure. Some people have a problem doing this, but if a society is to work obedience is said to be necessary. Many psychologists have investigated obedience:

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

Obedience means acting in response to a direct order, usually from an authority figure. Some people have a problem doing this, but if a society is to work obedience is said to be necessary. Many psychologists have investigated obedience: * Milgram (1963) * Hofling et al(1966) * Feldman & Scheihe * Meeus & Raaijmakers (1995) Milgram studied how far people will obey authority, even if it means harming someone. In this experiment 40 men volunteered for a study about 'learning and money', not knowing it was actually to test obedience. In this experiment the participant taught an acting participant word pairs, every time they answered incorrectly the participant had to give them an increasing level of an electric shock (the acting participant didn't actually receive any shocks he just acted like he did). In each level there was a title to each shock e.g. 'slight shock', 'moderate shock' and so on. It was predicted that almost no one would administer the highest shock, but most passed that mark, the conclusion of this experiment was that ordinary people obey orders even when they are acting against their conscience and hurting someone. ...read more.

Middle

The conclusion to this experiment was in real-life settings authority was high. I think this experiment is much more efficient at monitoring obedience than Milgram's. This was used in a real life environment and is something which nurses were frequently in contact with. This setting gives a more ecological validity and therefore less debateable. Meeus & Raaijmakers used interviews to test obedience. Participants were asked to conduct interviews to test job applicant's reactions to stress. The applicants were really actors. During the interview, the participants were asked to question the applicants with 'stress remarks', designed to give increasing levels of psychological harm. The applicants acted confident at first then broke down as the questions grew more intense. Despite the psychological difficulties the applicants were facing most participants asked all of the questions. In conclusion more people were prepared to inflict psychological harm in this realistic situation. I don't think this experiment was totally loyal to the 'realistic' value it was given, its not likely to go to an interview to suffer from such harsh questions, once again I believe the personality of the person is at influence over the results but not as intensely as in Milgram's experiment. ...read more.

Conclusion

Thus proving my point on Milgram's study, that people are less susceptible to inflicting shocks, depending on other people's perceptions on them who are there to watch their actions. I think that conformity is a big issue with obedience of different people. Apart from the above experiments there are many different fields to monitor an individual obedience level. If a society makes rules on how to live there is usually a select majority of that group who think differently and go from their own perceptions and views. People not conforming to rules isn't usually a bad thing, depending on people judging them. The biggest issues of conformity and obedience to those rules are put into social circles. The vast majority of people need to have rules to follow and a social crowd to fit into, they can't cope being singled out as a non conformer as they see this as a very bad thing. The minority of people just do as they wish careless to weather they fit in with a specific crowd or not. The human psychological mind craves to be accepted and will obey those of their social groups orders in order not to be singled out to a non conformist. ?? ?? ?? ?? ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level Social Psychology section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level Social Psychology essays

  1. Conformity & Obedience to Authority.

    Seventy-four percent of the candidates conformed at least some of the time and the mean average conformity rate for participants was thirty-two percent. * RICHARD CRUTCHFIELD (1954) The type of experiment undertaken by Asch is very time consuming, as only one person can be tested at a time.

  2. Theories On Obedience

    The participants in Milgrams study were said to be in the agentic state because they were told the responsibility did not lie with them, but the experimenter. This theory is supported by Bickmans study on the effect of uniforms on obedience, where people were more likely to obey someone who was wearing an authoritive uniform (i.e.

  1. Conformity and Obedience

    As the real reason was to test whether people would obey authority the researcher had some verbal prods to push the participants further when they started to feel anxious, as well as this pre recorded messages were to be played by Mr Wallace as the shocks grew more intense.

  2. Describe what psychologists know about leadership.

    Fiedler's contingency theory (1967) looks at the interaction between leadership style and the degree of control and influence given to the leader by the work situation. By means of the LPC measure, Fiedler determined whether the leader was task- or relationship-oriented by examining how harshly or leniently the leader has rated their least preferred co-worker on bipolar adjective rating scales.

  1. Conformity - psychologists view

    They were then told estimates of two other individuals who took part, under this influence they converged on similar figures. Since the movement is only apparent the correct answer is it doesn't, however Sherif's participants were not aware of this at the time.

  2. Psychology Questions Ansewered

    Choose one of the core studies listed below and answer the following questions. Rosenhan (sane in insane places) Milgram (obedience) Piliavin, Rodin and Piliavin (subway samaritans) (a) Describe how deception was used in your chosen study. [6] scroll up top to see the ethics for Rosenhan, for piliavin,rodin and piliavin 1)

  1. The Concepts Of Conformity And Obedience

    Tests were run using groups of seven to nine people who were asked to answer aloud. However, the experiment was rigged. Asch only used one guinea pig participant at any one time; the others were all confederates whose answers had been pre - determined.

  2. Analysis of the Milgram obedience experiment.

    Some questioned the experiment, but many were encouraged to go on and told they would not be responsible for any results. If at any time the subject indicated his desire to halt the experiment, he was told by the experimenter, Please continue.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work