Key Takeaways
- Obedience means doing what someone with more power tells you to do.
- Experiments show that many people will do what they are told, even if it goes against what they believe.
- Zimbardo’s prison experiment showed how role play can affect actions and obedience.
Obedience is a form of social influence that involves acting on the orders of an authority figure. It often involves actions a person would not have taken unless they were directed to do so by someone of authority or influence.
To understand obedience, it is important to also understand how it differs from compliance and conformity. Compliance involves changing your behavior at the request of another person, while conformity consists in altering your behavior to go along with the rest of the group.
Obedience vs. Conformity: How They Differ
Obedience is an essential concept in psychology. The question of why people obey others, its impact on society, and the factors that impact obedience are essential in understanding social behavior and social influence. However, obedience must be distinguished from other types of social influence, including conformity.
Obedience differs from conformity in three key ways:
- Obedience involves an order; conformity involves a request.
- Obedience is obeying someone of a higher status; conformity is going along with people of equal status.
- Obedience relies on social power; conformity relies on the need to be socially accepted.
Recap
Where obedience relies on direct orders, the perceived status and power of the person giving those orders, conformity is more about fitting in with the group. People obey because they are commanded to, but conform because they want to gain approval from their peers.
Milgram’s Obedience Experiments
During the 1950s, psychologist Stanley Milgram became intrigued with the conformity experiments performed by Solomon Asch. Asch’s work had demonstrated that people could easily be swayed to conform to group pressure, but Milgram wanted to see just how far people would be willing to go.
The trial of Adolf Eichmann, who had planned and managed the mass deportation of Jews during World War II, helped spark Milgram’s interest in obedience.
Throughout the trial, Eichmann suggested that he was simply following orders. He claimed that he felt no guilt for his role in the mass murders because he had only been doing what his superiors requested and he had played no role in the decision to exterminate the captives.
Milgram’s Question
After the horrors of the Holocaust, some people, such as Eichmann, explained their participation in the atrocities by suggesting they were doing as they were commanded.
Milgram had set out to explore the question, “Are Germans different?” In other words, he wondered if perhaps there were some factors at work that had made German citizens obey orders more than others might. He soon discovered, however, that many people are surprisingly obedient to authority.
Milgram wanted to know—would people really harm another person if they were ordered to by an authority figure? Just how powerful is the pressure to obey?
Milgram’s Results
Milgram’s studies involved placing participants in a room and directing them to deliver electrical shocks to a “learner” located in another room. Unbeknownst to the participant, the person supposedly receiving the shocks was actually in on the experiment and was merely acting out responses to imaginary shocks.
Surprisingly, Milgram found that 65% of participants were willing to deliver the maximum level of shocks on the experimenter’s orders.
Recent Criticisms Cast Doubt on Milgram’s Findings
Milgram’s experiments have long been criticized as unethical, but more recent findings have further complicated the legacy of his research. After examining experimental archives, researchers found that participants in the famous study were often coerced into delivering shocks, which has significant implications for the study’s final results.
While 65% of the participants followed orders, it is essential to note that the statistics only apply to one study variation. In other trials, fewer people were willing to go through with the shocks, and in some cases, every participant refused to follow orders.
Modern Replications
Despite the problems with Milgram’s original study, some researchers have been able to replicate his findings. In 2009, researchers partially replicated Milgram’s study, but with a top shock of 150 volts. The study found that obedience rates were only slightly lower than those originally reported by Milgram.
Another 2017 replication conducted by researcher in Poland found that 90% of people were willing to go to the highest voltage level.
Recap
While Milgram’s study had problems, subsequent research has suggested that people are surprisingly willing to obey orders.
Zimbardo’s Prison Experiment
Milgram’s controversial experiments generated a great deal of interest in the psychology of obedience. During the early 1970s, social psychologist Philip Zimbardo staged an exploration into the study of prisoners and prison life.
Zimbardo’s Experiment
He set up a mock prison in the basement of the Stanford University psychology department and assigned his participants to play the roles of either prisoners or guards, with Zimbardo himself acting as the prison warden.
According to the researchers, the study had to be discontinued after a mere six days even though it was initially slated to last two weeks. Why did the researchers end the experiment so early? Because the participants had become so involved in their roles, the guards utilized authoritarian techniques to gain the obedience of the prisoners.
The study’s authors suggested that the guards even subjected the prisoners to psychological abuse, harassment, and physical torture.
The results of the Stanford Prison Experiment are often used to demonstrate how easily people are influenced by characteristics of the roles and situations they are cast in, but Zimbardo also suggested that environmental factors play a role in how prone people are to obey authority.
Contemporary Criticisms
Like Milgram’s experiments, Zimbardo’s experiment has not fared well under more recent analysis. In addition to the long-noted ethical problems with the study, a more recent analysis of the study’s methods has revealed serious issues with the experiment’s design, methods, procedures, and authenticity.
Participants in the study reportedly faked their responses to leave early. Others reported amplifying their behaviors to help give the experimenters the results they were looking for. Critics suggest that the study lacks scientific merit and credibility due to these notable problems with its procedures.
Factors That Impact Obedience
A variety of individual and social factors can impact the likelihood that a person will obey a leader. Some factors that might play a role include:
- Personality characteristics: Certain personality traits, including conscientiousness and agreeableness, have been linked to greater obedience to authority.
- Psychological distance: You may be more likely to engage in obedience to authority if the effects of your obedience feel distant, abstract, or unconnected to your life.
- Ambiguity or lack of information: In ambiguous situations, a person may be more likely to obey someone who seems to have more information than they do.
- Fear of consequences: Obedience often happens because people fear the consequences of disobedience. Children often obey partners or teachers, for example, because they fear punishment or losing privileges if they disobey.
Understanding the Psychology of Obedience
Recognizing the power of obedience can help shed light on why people sometimes follow the orders of an authority figure, even if it violates their own personal beliefs or morals. Helping leaders understand their power in social situations can also help them use it more effectively and responsibly.
Building this understanding may also help people better recognize abuses of power and find ways to better promote responsible, ethical behavior.
Verywell Mind uses only high-quality sources, including peer-reviewed studies, to support the facts within our articles. Read our editorial process to learn more about how we fact-check and keep our content accurate, reliable, and trustworthy.
Stangor C, Jhangiani R, Tarry H. Principles of Social Psychology. Victoria: BC campus Open Textbook Project; 2014.
American Psychological Association. Obeying and resisting malevolent orders.
Milgram S. Obedience to Authority: an Experimental View. New York: Harper & Row; 1974.
Perry G. Deception and illusion in Milgram’s accounts of the obedience experiments. Theory Appl Ethics. 2013;2(2):79-92.
Burger JM. Replicating Milgram: Would people still obey today? Am Psychol. 2009;64(1):1-11. doi:10.1037/a0010932
Doliński D, Grzyb T, Folwarczny M, et al. Would you deliver an electric shock in 2015? Obedience in the experimental paradigm developed by Stanley Milgram in the 50 years following the original studies. Social Psychological and Personality Science. 2017;8(8):927-933. doi:10.1177/1948550617693060
American Psychological Association. Demonstrating the Power of Social Situations via a Simulated Prison Experiment.
Blum B. The lifespan of a lie. Medium.
Le Texier T. Debunking the Stanford Prison Experiment. American Psychologist. 2019;74(7):823-839. doi:10.1037/amp0000401
Bègue L, Beauvois JL, Courbet D, Oberlé D, Lepage J, Duke AA. Personality predicts obedience in a Milgram paradigm. J Pers. 2015;83(3):299-306. doi:10.1111/jopy.12104
Thanks for your feedback!
What is your feedback?
Helpful
Report an Error
Other
