Question

The destructive obedience that Stanley Milgram demonstrated in his experiments is most closely related to which of the following social psychological phenomena? a. Realistic conflict b. Attribution c. Foot-in-the-door compliance d. The frustration-aggression hypothesis

Short answer

c. Foot-in-the-door compliance

Step-by-step solution

Examine Each Option

Read and understand each option given for the question: - Realistic conflict involves competition for limited resources, leading to conflict and prejudice between groups. - Attribution refers to the process of explaining the causes of behavior and events. - Foot-in-the-door compliance is a technique that involves getting someone to agree to a large request by first setting them up with a smaller request. - The frustration-aggression hypothesis suggests that frustration leads to aggressive behavior.

Recall Milgram's Experiment

Stanley Milgram's experiment aimed to study obedience to authority figures, where participants were instructed to administer shocks to another person. This demonstrated people's willingness to comply with authority even against their moral compass.

Match Experiment to Phenomena

Compare the focus of Milgram's study with the social psychological phenomena: - Realistic conflict and the frustration-aggression hypothesis do not directly relate to obedience. - Attribution involves explanation of behavior rather than compliance or obedience. - Foot-in-the-door compliance involves a process where small compliance tasks lead to larger compliance tasks, similar to gradual obedience seen in Milgram's experiments.

Choose the Best Answer

The phenomenon most closely related to the gradual increase in compliance seen in Milgram's experiment is "c. Foot-in-the-door compliance" because the experiment demonstrated how initial minor obedience led participants to comply with significant actions due to authority.

Key concepts

Destructive Obedience

Destructive obedience occurs when individuals comply with orders that result in harm or negative consequences for others, often against their own ethical beliefs. This phenomenon is critical in understanding how ordinary people can commit acts they usually would not consider. Milgram's experiments on obedience highlight this behavior by showing that people are willing to follow authority figures even when it involves administering painful actions to others.
In many cases, destructive obedience is not due to the followers' intentions or beliefs but rather the powerful influence of authority. People might justify their actions by shifting responsibility to the authority figure, often feeling they have no choice but to obey.

• It demonstrates the impact of social structures and how authority can manipulate individual actions.
• Ethical considerations and moral judgments can become compromised under perceived legitimate commands.

This concept highlights the need for ethical leadership and the importance of personal accountability.

Milgram Experiment

The Milgram Experiment, conducted by psychologist Stanley Milgram in the 1960s, examined how far people would go in obeying an authority figure when the actions conflicted with their personal morals. Participants were led to believe they were involved in a study on learning and memory. They were instructed to administer electric shocks to another person (an actor) each time an incorrect answer was given.
The shocks increased in intensity, with the actor pretending to be in distress. Despite showing signs of stress and questioning the procedure, many participants continued to deliver shocks due to the presence of an authoritative experimenter who insisted they continue.

• This experiment demonstrated that obedience to authority is deeply ingrained in society.
• It revealed the potential for compliance even when harming others.

Milgram's findings raise important questions about responsibility and ethics in hierarchical structures, leading to further research on authority and conformity.

Foot-in-the-Door Technique

The Foot-in-the-Door Technique is a psychological strategy used to convince individuals to agree to a larger request by first getting them to consent to a smaller, related request. It is based on the principle of consistency, where agreeing to a small request increases the likelihood of agreement to a subsequent larger request, as people prefer to appear consistent in their actions.
This technique is evident in everyday scenarios and marketing strategies. For instance, a salesperson might first ask a potential customer to try a free sample before asking them to make a purchase.

• The initial small commitment makes it harder to refuse the larger request later.
• The incremental approach reduces resistance and increases compliance to more significant demands.

In the context of Milgram's experiment, participants initially complied with giving mild shocks, which made them more likely to continue obeying commands as the shock intensity increased.

Compliance and Authority

Compliance involves changing one's behavior due to the request or direction of another person, and it is strongly influenced by authority. Authority figures, such as leaders, teachers, or law enforcement, possess power that can compel others to follow their directives.
Various factors enhance authority-induced compliance, including perceived legitimacy, expertise, and social norms. People often comply because doing so is associated with expected behaviors in society, and disobedience may lead to negative consequences.

• Compliance is often automatic, as questioning authority can be uncomfortable or socially unacceptable.
• Authority figures are seen as credible sources, which encourages adherence to their commands.

Understanding the dynamics of compliance and authority is crucial in recognizing how hierarchical structures can influence behaviors, sometimes leading to negative outcomes like destructive obedience.