Edexcel A-Level Psychology: Obedience & Prejudice Theories (Full AO1 + AO3 Notes)
Agency Theory (Obedience)
(AO1) Core concepts:
Agentic state:
A mental state where an individual sees themselves as an agent for an authority figure.
They follow orders given by the authority figure with power (AFP) because they believe
the AFP will take responsibility for their actions.
Moral strain:
The psychological discomfort experienced when obeying orders against their morals.
This leads to anxiety or guilt, individuals may continue obeying believing their actions
are beneficial for society. This is experienced in the agentic state.
Autonomous state:
A state in which an individual acts according to their own free will and takes full
responsibility for their actions. This may be due to no AFP being present.
Agentic shift:
The process of moving from the autonomous state to the agentic state, usually due to
the presence of an AFP.
AO3: Supporting evidence: Stanley Milgram Shock Study (1963)
- 65% of participants continues to 450V
- Suggests participants had entered the agentic state
- They believed the experimenter (AFP) was responsible
Strengths :)
, 1. Research support (Milgram)
Milgram’s findings support agency theory, as many participants obeyed the
authority figure despite moral conflict. This suggests individuals enter the
agentic state and shift responsibility.
2. Real-word application
Agency theory helps explain events like the The Holocaust, where individuals
followed orders from authority figures despite moral objections.
Weaknesses :(
1. Contradictory evidence (Milgram 35%)
35% of participants in Milgram’s study refused to continue to 450V. This
suggests not everyone enters the agentic state, even in the presence of an
authority figure.
2. Ignores individual differences
The theory does not account for personality factors, such as the
authoritarian personality, which may explain an individual's obedience.
Conclusion: While agency theory provides a useful explanation of obedience,
the theory is oversimplified. Other factors, such as personality and situational
variables, should also be considered to fully understand destructive
obedience.
Social Impact Theory (Obedience)
(AO1) Core concepts:
Source = the individual exerting social influence (giving the orders).
Target = The individual being influenced (following the orders).
Agency Theory (Obedience)
(AO1) Core concepts:
Agentic state:
A mental state where an individual sees themselves as an agent for an authority figure.
They follow orders given by the authority figure with power (AFP) because they believe
the AFP will take responsibility for their actions.
Moral strain:
The psychological discomfort experienced when obeying orders against their morals.
This leads to anxiety or guilt, individuals may continue obeying believing their actions
are beneficial for society. This is experienced in the agentic state.
Autonomous state:
A state in which an individual acts according to their own free will and takes full
responsibility for their actions. This may be due to no AFP being present.
Agentic shift:
The process of moving from the autonomous state to the agentic state, usually due to
the presence of an AFP.
AO3: Supporting evidence: Stanley Milgram Shock Study (1963)
- 65% of participants continues to 450V
- Suggests participants had entered the agentic state
- They believed the experimenter (AFP) was responsible
Strengths :)
, 1. Research support (Milgram)
Milgram’s findings support agency theory, as many participants obeyed the
authority figure despite moral conflict. This suggests individuals enter the
agentic state and shift responsibility.
2. Real-word application
Agency theory helps explain events like the The Holocaust, where individuals
followed orders from authority figures despite moral objections.
Weaknesses :(
1. Contradictory evidence (Milgram 35%)
35% of participants in Milgram’s study refused to continue to 450V. This
suggests not everyone enters the agentic state, even in the presence of an
authority figure.
2. Ignores individual differences
The theory does not account for personality factors, such as the
authoritarian personality, which may explain an individual's obedience.
Conclusion: While agency theory provides a useful explanation of obedience,
the theory is oversimplified. Other factors, such as personality and situational
variables, should also be considered to fully understand destructive
obedience.
Social Impact Theory (Obedience)
(AO1) Core concepts:
Source = the individual exerting social influence (giving the orders).
Target = The individual being influenced (following the orders).
