The Science Behind Obedience and its Phycological Impact

Have you ever done something you knew wasn’t right? Why did you do it?

One of the questions phycologists have been pondering for years is why are people driven to do such unethical things? Since the beginning of human history, obedience has been a major factor in the progression of wars, revolutions, rebellions, and has continued to play a role in our lives today. But what drives obedience in situations like these? What drove colonists to murder millions of Indigenous people during westward expansion for their country? Why did Nazis in World War II take part in a massive genocide of their country at the command of a single dictator? 

Stanley Milgram, an assistant social psychology professor at Yale University conducted an experiment to test why ordinary people were compelled to perform immoral acts in the name of authority. This experiment, labeled the Milgram Experiment, involved three participants, two actors and one volunteer who was paid a small amount of money to participate. “Volunteers were told that they would be randomly assigned either a “teacher” or “learner” role, with each teacher administering electric shocks to a learner in another room if the learner failed to answer questions correctly. In actuality, the random draw was fixed so that all the volunteer participants were assigned to the teacher role and the actors were assigned to the learner role.” (Britannica). The questions asked by the teacher were simple questions, and if answered incorrectly, the teacher was instructed to administer an electrical shock for each one wrong. From 15 volts- a slight shock- to 450 volts- a deathly amount- the teachers were expected to continue to 450 shocks. In the original version of the experiment, pre-recorded complaints and screams were played “coming from the learner”, saying things like “Ugh!!! Hey, this really hurts” at 120 volts, (Intense scream) “I told you I refuse to answer. I’m no longer part of this experiment” at 350 volts, and complete silence at 450 volts. This experiment resulted in 65% of participants (male) making it all the way to 450 volts, with 80% of participants past 150 volts continuing all the way. The results of this experiment reveal the impact the authorial presence has when making decisions, despite how unethical or inhumane it was. Despite all participants knowing the amount of deathly shock they were inflicting upon the learner at 450 volts, they continued to obey the experimenter. 

After participants were told the traumatic experience they had just gone through was merely an experiment, people were left in utter shock and derealization. Believing you had just killed an innocent person for a “test” leaves a strong mark on one’s trauma and wellbeing.

This raises an important question- how significant is the authorial role? Factors that make somebody believe they need to submit to authority lay in simple things such as uniform, agentic state, proximity, and location.

1. Uniform. One of the first observations we notice when meeting people is their appearance. From styled pinned up hair on heads, to comfy clogs on feet, clothing is one of the most derivative factors of our appearance. One of the variables that heavily impacted the Milgram experiment was the appearance of the experimenter. When wearing a lab coat, the experimenter is able to display credibility through his job as a “scientist” conducting the experiment, and therefore makes people more likely to do what he advises since he is the scientist after all. When not wearing any sort of lab coat, or distinctive uniform, the obedience lowered to 20%. 

2. Agentic State. Another important factor is the agentic state, which describes the amount of responsibility someone feels towards something. In this experiment, the participants were told that the experimenter took responsibility for anything that happened in the experiment. This small fact could change if the participants act autonomously or enter the agentic state, where essentially “nothing would be their fault”. When another actor was added to the experiment to facilitate the teachers actions, obedience increased to 92%.

3. Proximity. Proximity plays a large role in our emotions when doing something to hurt someone. For example, in the experiment, the learner was put into a separate room than the teacher, so they wouldn’t see them, only hear them. When testing again, this variable was changed, and the learner was placed directly next to the teacher, and able to see and hear the learner during electrical shocks. The obedience to continue lowered to 40%.

4. Location. Lastly, is location. Similarly to uniform, the location or area of something is something we notice immediately. Would you be more likely to leave a 5 star review for a restaurant next to a noisy factory? Or the restaurant in a secluded, quiet area? One of the factors shifted in Milgram’s experiment was the location of the experiment itself. Formally being in a classroom of Yale University, Milgram moved to a shabby, unappealing room next to a street, instead. The obedience with this factor changed dropped to 47.5%. 

We tend to typically play off many small factors like these, despite the large impact they have on how we act morally. Choosing to inflict or not inflict pain upon somebody because of a lab coat might sound ridiculous, but it is a major form of how authority is administered. Looking into our lives, we can see police officers with belts, tools, and badges, and grocery store workers in aprons and name tags. Small details can cause a huge effect in how we act and make decisions.