Dispositional explanations of obedience: The authoritarian personality
Overview: An assumption by Adorno was that people obey because of personality
characteristics, that those with extreme respect for authority are most likely to obey, be
dogmatic, conformist will likely have an authoritarian personality with a ‘black and white
worldview’.
People with an authoritarian personality are obedient towards those of a higher status and
disregard those of a perceived lower status. This is explained through harsh upbringing,
whereby these resent parent control, this is displaced onto the socially inferior (known as
scapegoating)
This is dispositional as it explains obedient behaviour in terms of internal traits rather than
external (situational factors)
Relevant study-measurement: Adorno measured the authoritarian personality using the F-scale
questionnaire of 2000 participants asking questions such as “Obedience and respect are the most
important things children should learn “and found that people who scored highly were conscious of
their own and others status and showed extreme respect to authority and contempt for the ‘weak’.
A03 Evaluation
Ignores situational factors: Dispositional explanations can’t explain obedience in entire societies,
though it could be argued that social context may be more important than personality traits to
understand obedience. For example, The German population mostly identified with the Nazi state
during extermination of the Jews, yet it is highly unlikely they all had the authoritarian personality.
Perhaps situational factors such as proximity, uniform and location as studied by Milgram, are
more appropriate when assessing obedience. This is a limitation to the theory, in the suggestion that
personality alone cannot explain obedience on a mass scale.
Methodological issues: It Is difficult to establish cause and effect between parenting style and
obedience because Adorno’s research was based on retrospective data. It could be that a third
unconsidered factor such as education may determine both authoritarianism and obedience.
(Developed) further, the methodology of the F scale as a measurement is criticised by Greenstein as
the ‘comedy of methodological errors’, as questions were worded in the same ‘direction’ so those
who select agree consistently without thorough thought (acquiescence bias). And if the measuring
tool is flawed, perhaps there are implications that the theory itself is invalid.
Research support: Milgram and elms support the idea of dispositional explanations for obedience.
They interviewed 20 fully obedient participants and found they had higher authoritarian levels
compared to a less obedient control group, providing support for this explanation. (Developed)
however, this link is only correlational between variables making it difficult to establish causation,
these questions whether it stands as adequate support for this explanation, and if the research that
supports it is invalid, perhaps the dispositional explanations for obedience themselves are invalid.
Overview: An assumption by Adorno was that people obey because of personality
characteristics, that those with extreme respect for authority are most likely to obey, be
dogmatic, conformist will likely have an authoritarian personality with a ‘black and white
worldview’.
People with an authoritarian personality are obedient towards those of a higher status and
disregard those of a perceived lower status. This is explained through harsh upbringing,
whereby these resent parent control, this is displaced onto the socially inferior (known as
scapegoating)
This is dispositional as it explains obedient behaviour in terms of internal traits rather than
external (situational factors)
Relevant study-measurement: Adorno measured the authoritarian personality using the F-scale
questionnaire of 2000 participants asking questions such as “Obedience and respect are the most
important things children should learn “and found that people who scored highly were conscious of
their own and others status and showed extreme respect to authority and contempt for the ‘weak’.
A03 Evaluation
Ignores situational factors: Dispositional explanations can’t explain obedience in entire societies,
though it could be argued that social context may be more important than personality traits to
understand obedience. For example, The German population mostly identified with the Nazi state
during extermination of the Jews, yet it is highly unlikely they all had the authoritarian personality.
Perhaps situational factors such as proximity, uniform and location as studied by Milgram, are
more appropriate when assessing obedience. This is a limitation to the theory, in the suggestion that
personality alone cannot explain obedience on a mass scale.
Methodological issues: It Is difficult to establish cause and effect between parenting style and
obedience because Adorno’s research was based on retrospective data. It could be that a third
unconsidered factor such as education may determine both authoritarianism and obedience.
(Developed) further, the methodology of the F scale as a measurement is criticised by Greenstein as
the ‘comedy of methodological errors’, as questions were worded in the same ‘direction’ so those
who select agree consistently without thorough thought (acquiescence bias). And if the measuring
tool is flawed, perhaps there are implications that the theory itself is invalid.
Research support: Milgram and elms support the idea of dispositional explanations for obedience.
They interviewed 20 fully obedient participants and found they had higher authoritarian levels
compared to a less obedient control group, providing support for this explanation. (Developed)
however, this link is only correlational between variables making it difficult to establish causation,
these questions whether it stands as adequate support for this explanation, and if the research that
supports it is invalid, perhaps the dispositional explanations for obedience themselves are invalid.
