Why do ordinary people obey authority figures even when ordered to harm others?
Explain obedience to authority and the factors that influence it, with reference to Milgram's experiments and their ethical evaluation
WACE Year 12 Psychology Unit 4: obedience to authority, the factors that increase or decrease it, Milgram's shock experiments, the agentic state, and the ethical evaluation of the research.
Reviewed by: AI editorial process; not yet individually human-reviewed
Have a quick question? Jump to the Q&A page
Jump to a section
What this dot point is asking
SCSA asks you to define obedience, distinguish it from conformity, describe Milgram's procedure and findings, explain the factors that affect obedience, and evaluate the ethics of the research. The marked skill is using Milgram's exact findings and applying the situational factors.
What obedience is
Obedience is changing behaviour in response to a direct order from a person in a position of authority. Unlike conformity, which is a response to peers of equal status, obedience involves a clear hierarchy and an explicit command. It is socially useful when authority is legitimate, but dangerous when people obey orders to cause harm.
Milgram's experiments
Stanley Milgram investigated how far people would go in obeying an authority figure. Participants were told they were in a study of learning and punishment. Acting as the teacher, each participant was instructed to deliver increasing electric shocks to a learner (a confederate) each time he answered incorrectly. The shock generator was labelled up to 450 volts, marked with danger warnings. No real shocks were given, but participants believed they were.
As the learner protested, screamed and then fell silent, many participants became distressed and wanted to stop, but the experimenter urged them to continue with prompts such as that the experiment required them to go on. About 65 percent of participants continued to the maximum 450 volts. The result shocked psychologists because the participants were ordinary people, not unusually cruel.
Factors affecting obedience
Milgram's many variations identified situational factors that change obedience.
- Legitimacy of authority: obedience was higher when the experimenter wore a lab coat and the study ran at a prestigious university, and lower in a rundown office.
- Proximity of the authority: obedience fell when the experimenter gave orders by telephone rather than in person.
- Proximity of the victim: obedience fell as the learner became more present, dropping further when the teacher had to place the learner's hand on a shock plate.
- Presence of disobedient peers: when confederates refused to continue, obedience collapsed, because their defiance gave the participant a model for resistance.
Ethical evaluation
Milgram's research is famous partly for its ethical problems. Participants were deceived about the true aim and the shocks, experienced severe distress, and may have felt their right to withdraw was undermined by the experimenter's prompts. Milgram defended the work by debriefing participants, surveying them afterwards (most said they were glad to have taken part), and arguing the findings were too important to obtain otherwise. The study is now used to illustrate why informed consent, the right to withdraw and protection from harm matter.
Why obedience matters
Obedience research helps explain atrocities, workplace misconduct and following harmful orders, while also showing that situational factors, not just personality, drive behaviour. It informs training that encourages people to question illegitimate authority and to recognise the agentic state.