Database results:
    examBoard: AQA
    examType: GCSE
    lessonTitle: Agency in Obedience
    
Psychology - Social Context and Behaviour - Social Influence - Obedience - Agency in Obedience - BrainyLemons
« Back to Menu ๐Ÿง  Test Your Knowledge!

Obedience ยป Agency in Obedience

What you'll learn this session

Study time: 30 minutes

  • The concept of agency in obedience studies
  • How the agentic state differs from the autonomous state
  • Milgram's agency theory and its key components
  • Research evidence supporting and challenging agency theory
  • Real-world applications and implications of agency in obedience
  • How agency theory helps explain destructive obedience

Understanding Agency in Obedience

When people follow orders that harm others, how do they justify their actions? Agency theory helps explain why ordinary people sometimes do terrible things when told to by an authority figure. This concept is crucial for understanding some of the darkest chapters in human history, from war crimes to corporate scandals.

Key Definitions:

  • Agency: The state of being or feeling responsible for one's actions.
  • Agentic state: A mental condition where a person sees themselves as an agent carrying out another person's wishes rather than being responsible for their actions.
  • Autonomous state: A mental condition where a person feels personally responsible for their actions and decisions.
  • Agentic shift: The psychological process of moving from an autonomous state to an agentic state when faced with authority.

👤 Autonomous State

In this state, you feel fully responsible for your actions. You make decisions based on your own moral compass and values. You consider the consequences of your actions and take ownership of them.

Example: Refusing to follow an order to hurt someone because you believe hurting others is wrong.

🧔 Agentic State

In this state, you view yourself merely as an agent executing someone else's orders. You shift responsibility to the authority figure giving commands. Your own moral values become secondary to following instructions.

Example: Administering painful electric shocks in Milgram's experiment because "the scientist told me to continue."

Milgram's Agency Theory

Stanley Milgram developed agency theory to explain the shocking results of his famous obedience experiments. He wanted to understand how ordinary people could commit harmful acts when ordered to do so. According to Milgram, people enter an "agentic state" when faced with authority figures, allowing them to perform actions they would normally find morally wrong.

Components of Agency Theory

Milgram identified several key factors that contribute to the agentic shift and maintain people in an agentic state:

🛡 Legitimate Authority

People are more likely to obey those they perceive as having legitimate authority (like scientists, doctors, teachers). The authority's status and expertise make their commands seem valid and proper.

📝 Binding Factors

Once people begin obeying, several factors keep them in the agentic state: politeness, desire to keep promises, anxiety about breaking social norms and awkwardness of withdrawal.

🚫 Denial of Responsibility

In the agentic state, people deny personal responsibility with statements like "I was just following orders" or "I had no choice." This mental shift protects their self-image.

Case Study Focus: Milgram's Obedience Experiments

In Milgram's classic 1963 experiments, participants were ordered to administer increasingly powerful electric shocks to a "learner" (actually an actor) when they gave wrong answers. Despite hearing cries of pain, about 65% of participants continued to the maximum 450-volt shock when prompted by the experimenter with phrases like "The experiment requires that you continue."

When interviewed afterwards, many participants explained their behaviour by saying they were "just following orders" and that responsibility lay with the experimenter. This clearly demonstrated the agentic shift in action.

Evidence Supporting Agency Theory

Several aspects of Milgram's research provide evidence for the existence of the agentic state:

  • Participant statements: Many participants explicitly denied responsibility, saying things like "If it were up to me, I would have stopped."
  • Variation studies: When the experimenter left the room and gave orders by telephone, obedience dropped dramatically (from 65% to 20.5%), showing that physical presence of authority matters.
  • Proximity variations: Obedience decreased when participants had to physically force the learner's hand onto a shock plate, suggesting that direct personal responsibility increases autonomous thinking.

Challenges to Agency Theory

While influential, agency theory has faced several criticisms:

Limitations

Agency theory doesn't fully explain why some people resist authority while others comply. Individual differences in personality, moral reasoning and cultural background also play important roles that the theory doesn't address.

The theory also doesn't account for situations where people willingly obey harmful orders because they genuinely believe in the cause or agree with the authority's goals.

🔬 Alternative Explanations

Some researchers suggest that participants in Milgram's studies weren't simply shifting responsibility but were actively identifying with the scientific goals of the experiment.

Others propose that gradual commitment (the "foot-in-the-door" effect) better explains why participants continued โ€“ they had already given small shocks, making it easier to continue with larger ones.

Real-World Applications

Understanding agency has important implications for preventing harmful obedience in various contexts:

Preventing Harmful Obedience

💼 Workplace

Companies now often train employees to question unethical orders and establish whistleblower protections. The "I was just following orders" defence is no longer accepted in most corporate environments.

Military

Modern military training emphasises that soldiers have a duty to disobey unlawful orders. This represents a shift from absolute obedience to ethical responsibility.

👪 Society

Educational programmes now teach critical thinking and moral reasoning to help people maintain their autonomous state when faced with authority figures.

Historical Example: The Nuremberg Trials

After World War II, many Nazi officials defended their actions by claiming they were "just following orders." The Nuremberg Trials established that individuals have personal responsibility for their actions regardless of orders from superiors. This legal precedent rejected the agentic state as a valid defence for war crimes.

The principle established at Nuremberg โ€“ that "following orders" does not absolve personal responsibility โ€“ has become a cornerstone of international law and ethics.

Factors That Influence Agency

Several factors can strengthen or weaken a person's tendency to enter an agentic state:

  • Cultural factors: Some cultures emphasise collective obedience more than individual autonomy.
  • Personality traits: Research suggests that people with authoritarian personalities are more likely to obey authority figures unquestioningly.
  • Situational pressure: Time pressure, unclear responsibility and group dynamics can all increase the likelihood of shifting to an agentic state.
  • Moral development: People with more developed moral reasoning may be better able to resist harmful orders.

Developing Autonomous Thinking

Psychology offers several strategies for maintaining autonomous thinking when faced with authority:

💡 Critical Thinking Strategies

Developing the habit of questioning orders and considering their consequences can help maintain autonomous thinking. Ask yourself: "Would I make this decision if I were fully responsible for the outcome?"

Seeking diverse perspectives and being aware of social influence can also strengthen your ability to resist harmful commands.

🧠 Practical Applications

Practice recognising situations where you might slip into an agentic state. Look for phrases in your thinking like "I have no choice" or "I'm just doing what I'm told."

Remember that feeling uncomfortable about an order might be a sign that your autonomous moral judgement is being violated.

Conclusion

Agency theory provides a powerful framework for understanding why people sometimes obey harmful orders. By recognising the shift between autonomous and agentic states, we can better understand both historical atrocities and everyday compliance with questionable instructions.

The most important takeaway is that awareness of these psychological processes gives us power to resist them. By understanding how easily we can shift responsibility to authority figures, we can develop strategies to maintain our moral autonomy even in challenging situations.

๐Ÿง  Test Your Knowledge!
Chat to Psychology tutor