Database results:
examBoard: AQA
examType: GCSE
lessonTitle: Dispositional Factors in Obedience
When we look at why some people are more likely to obey authority than others, psychologists often point to dispositional factors - the personality traits and characteristics that make each person unique. These internal factors can help explain why, in the same situation, different people might behave very differently when faced with authority figures.
Key Definitions:
Our personality traits can significantly influence how we respond to authority figures. Some people naturally question authority, while others tend to follow instructions without hesitation. Understanding these differences helps explain variations in obedient behaviour that can't be explained by situational factors alone.
Studying dispositional factors helps us understand why some people resist harmful orders while others comply. This knowledge is crucial for preventing dangerous obedience in real-world settings like workplaces, military and healthcare environments.
The concept of the authoritarian personality was developed by Theodor Adorno and colleagues in 1950, following World War II. They wanted to understand why so many ordinary Germans had followed Hitler's orders and participated in the Holocaust.
People with authoritarian personalities typically display several key traits that make them more likely to obey authority figures, even when asked to do harmful things:
Black and white thinking with little tolerance for ambiguity. Things are either right or wrong with no middle ground.
Strong submission to authority figures and a tendency to idealise those in power.
Tendency to be hostile toward people from different groups and to stereotype others.
Adorno developed the F-Scale (F for 'fascism') to measure authoritarian personality traits. The questionnaire includes items like "Obedience and respect for authority are the most important virtues children should learn." Higher scores indicate stronger authoritarian tendencies. The scale has been criticised for measuring conservative political views rather than just authoritarianism and for being vulnerable to social desirability bias (people answering in ways they think will make them look good).
Another important dispositional factor in obedience is a person's locus of control, a concept developed by Julian Rotter in 1966.
People with an internal locus of control believe they are in charge of their own lives and outcomes. They're more likely to:
People with an external locus of control believe their lives are controlled by outside forces like luck, fate, or powerful others. They're more likely to:
After Milgram's famous obedience experiments, researchers wanted to know if personality traits could predict who would obey. Elms and Milgram gave personality tests to participants from the original study and found:
Thomas Blass reviewed multiple studies on personality and obedience and found that authoritarian personality consistently predicted obedient behaviour across different studies. However, the relationship wasn't extremely strong, suggesting that while personality matters, situational factors (like proximity to the victim or the setting of the experiment) often have a more powerful influence on whether someone obeys harmful commands.
While dispositional factors are important, most psychologists now recognise that obedience is best explained by an interaction between personality traits and situational factors. This is known as the interactionist approach.
The interactionist perspective suggests that both personality and situation matter when predicting obedience:
Personality traits like authoritarianism and locus of control influence how likely someone is to obey.
Factors like proximity to the victim, legitimacy of authority and presence of role models affect obedience.
The combination of personality and situation creates a unique response for each person in each context.
Understanding dispositional factors in obedience has practical applications in many settings. For example, military training now often includes ethical decision-making components that teach soldiers to question orders that violate international law. Healthcare settings implement protocols that empower staff with different personality types to speak up when they see potential harm, regardless of hierarchy. These approaches recognise that while some people are naturally more questioning of authority, systems can be designed to encourage everyone to resist harmful obedience.
Log in to track your progress and mark lessons as complete!
Login NowDon't have an account? Sign up here.