Authority relationships between obedience and disobedience

Recent episodes of public dissent (such as the demonstrations against G8 policies) raise the issue of the psychological processes triggered in obeying and disobeying the authority. Even if obedience to authority is an important aspect of social life and it plays a key role in maintaining social order, the concept of obedience has been studied in social psychology mainly in terms of its destructive aspects. Besides, most of the studies have overlooked the role of disobedience in the authority relationship. Disobedience may be conceived of as a protest that undermines the legitimacy of the authority or it can represent an instrument for controlling the legitimacy of the authority's demands, becoming a factor protecting against authoritarianism. In this article, a new perspective on the study of the relationship between the individual and the authority is put forward, considering obedience and disobedience as parallel concepts, each having constructive and destructive aspects.     

When Fairness Clashes with Personal Autonomy and Parental Authority: A Comparison of Daughters' and Mothers' Reasoning in Two Cultural Contexts in Turkey

The author examined religious and secular daughters' and mothers' reasoning about personal autonomy, maternal authority, and moral concepts in family decision-making situations in urban Turkey. Sixty-eight daughters and 34 mothers were individually interviewed about decision-making autonomy in general issues and hypothetical daughter–mother conflicts. Results indicated participants regardless of their family status and religious background assigned more decision-making autonomy to mothers when evaluating general issues. Analysis of controversial issues as hypothetical conflicts indicated that daughters and mothers do not hold unitary social judgments about the social world that were always consistent with the norms of their community and family status. There were some religious background differences in evaluations of some conflict stories as a function of whether they evaluated the choices as moral, conventional, personal, and prudential matters. Although secular and religious participants conceptualized daughters and mothers in relational terms rather than characterizing the relations and social issues by harmony, obedience to authority, and acceptance of norms findings suggested that secular women evaluated the hypothetical adolescent–mother conflicts more consistently when the issue entails violation of a moral principle such as justice, fairness, and well-being of the other.     

Emotion regulation in violent conflict: reappraisal, hope, and support for humanitarian aid to the opponent in wartime

It is well known that negative intergroup emotions such as anger, fear, and hatred play a major role in initiating and maintaining intergroup conflicts. It is far less clear, however, what factors promote the resolution of intergroup conflicts. Using an emotion regulation- framework, we hypothesised that one form of emotion regulation-namely cognitive reappraisal-should play a salutary role in such conflicts, and be associated with increased hope as well as greater support for humanitarian aid to out-group members. To test these hypotheses, we used a nationwide survey of Jewish-Israeli adults, conducted during the war in Gaza between Israelis and Palestinians. Results obtained via structural equation modelling revealed that Israelis who regulated their negative emotions during the war through reappraisal were more supportive in providing humanitarian aid to innocent Palestinian citizens and that this relation was partially mediated by an enhanced feeling of hope.     

An investigation of the social identity model of collective action and the 'sedative' effect of intergroup contact among Black and White students in South Africa

Two studies investigated the role of intergroup contact in predicting collective action tendencies along with three key predictors proposed by the social identity model of collective action (SIMCA; Van Zomeren, Postmes, & Spears, 2008). Study 1 (N= 488 Black South African students) tested whether social identity would positively, whereas intergroup contact would negatively predict collective action and support for policies benefiting the ingroup. Study 2 (N= 244 White South African students) predicted whether social identity would positively predict collective action benefiting the ingroup, and intergroup contact would positively predict support for policies to benefit the Black outgroup. Both studies yielded evidence in support of the predictive power of social identity and contact on collective action and policy support. Additionally, Study 1 confirmed that intergroup contact moderated the effects of social identity on relative deprivation, and relative deprivation on collective action. Overall findings support an integration of SIMCA and intergroup contact theory, and provide a fuller understanding of the social psychological processes leading to collective action.     

The political solidarity model of social change: dynamics of self-categorization in intergroup power relations

Social and political change involves a challenge to the status quo in intergroup power relations. Traditionally, the social psychology of social change has focused on disadvantaged minority groups collectively challenging the decisions, actions, and policies of those in positions of established authority. In contrast, this article presents a political solidarity model of social change that explores the process by which members of the majority challenge the authority in solidarity with the minority. It is argued that political solidarity as a social change process involves a contest between the authority and the minority over the meaning of a shared (higher order) identity with the majority. When identity ceases to be shared with the authority and becomes shared with the minority, majority challenge to authority in solidarity with the minority becomes possible. The model's contributions to existing social psychological approaches to social change are also discussed.     

Putting the onus on authority: A review of obedient behavior and why we should move on

The obedience to authority domain arose in psychological research between the 1950s–1960s as a combination of interest in obedience, conformity, and compliance that expanded after Milgram's shock experiments. Each of these components compared different forms of submissive behavior as a response to authority and social pressure, but over the past fifty years the domain has merged these three components and become more centered around the shock of submissive behavior than the authority that causes it. As a result, many modern investigations use inconsistent understandings of these constructs and often leave out manipulation of the second half of the paradigm – authority. If we reintroduce the distinctions for each form of submissive behavior, we can notice patterns of how each is related to differences in authority and the systemic benefits of studying the nuances of authoritative systems. Understanding the impact of power dynamics on submissive behavior and what truly separates obedience from conformity and compliance not only allows for a more dualistic approach to this discipline, but allows the authority domain to provide insight into other domains such as education, workplace behavior, and conformity to mass media.     

The obedience–disobedience dynamic and the role of responsibility

Obedience has been thoroughly studied in social psychology, both in its positive and negative aspects. Nevertheless, in these empirical studies disobedience has been considered to be the opposite of obedience and indeed its negation. Instead, some recent studies suggest that if obedience to authority is important in ensuring the continuity of social and group life, disobedience is crucial, under some circumstances, in stopping the authority relationship from degenerating into an authoritarian relationship. In this perspective, disobedience may be conceived of as a protest undermining the legitimacy of authority, or else it can represent an instrument of the community for controlling the legitimacy of the authority's demands, becoming a factor safeguarding against authoritarianism. The aim of the present study was to empirically verify the dynamics existing between disobedience and obedience. The results show that people who attach importance to both obedience and disobedience in the relationship between the individual and society recognize the importance of democratic values and consider themselves responsible for the defence of human rights. Instead, people who only recognize the value of obedience and consider disobedience as a threat to the status quo are more authoritarian, individualistic people. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Social Dominance Orientation and the Ideological Legitimization of Social Policy1

Much of politics is involved with the distribution of resources and the regulation of intergroup relations. Social dominance theory posits that social ideologies provide social justification for policies that have unequal effects on different social groups. In the present studies, we examine the mediating role that ideologies have in transforming people's general orientation toward group inequality into policy support. Using data from 5 samples, we offer evidence that social dominance orientation orients people to support discriminatory ideologies, which in turn influence support for policies. Support for the theoretical model was shown in studies of both long-standing social policy attitudes, such as toward social welfare and military programs, and of unfolding political events, including Clarence Thomas' nomination to the Supreme Court, the Persian Gulf War, and reinstitution of the death penalty in California.     

Compensation vs. Fair Equality of Opportunity

ABSTRACT In this paper I attempt to show that our commonly shared ideas of justice, which include principles of fair distribution and of compensation for past injustices, tend to come into conflict in practice, and generate serious dilemmas for persons in certain positions of authority, such as managers. I identify the source and nature of such dilemmas, and sketch a rough pattern for analysing and partially resolving conflicts between the duty not to discriminate unfairly and the duty to compensate for past unfair discrimination. After stating what I regard as widely shared ideas of justice, I emphasise their application to actual policy decisions of the small-scale sort, using general precepts for avoiding or minimising conflicts. The precepts include a commitment to the priority of compensatory justice. The paper includes theoretical portions, principally defences of my position against other views on the relationship between compensation and fair distribution. I end with an examination of the virtues and limitations of money as a tool for compensatory social policies.     

The positive effect of negative emotions in protracted conflict: The case of anger

Extant research has demonstrated the destructive role that anger plays in the context of intergroup conflict. Among other findings, it has been established that anger elevates public support for aggressive and violent actions towards the outgroup. This finding has been explained by the unique cognitive appraisals, emotional goal, and response tendencies associated with anger, typified by appraised relative strength and high control, motivation to correct perceived wrongdoings, and willingness to engage in risky behavior. In the current work we examine an innovative assumption, according to which the apparent destructive implications of anger are a result of situational range restriction—namely, that anger as a group emotion has been examined almost solely at the escalation stage of conflict. Instead, we propose that the same unique characteristics of anger can bring about constructive political attitudes and support for non-violent policies in the context of systematic efforts to de-escalate a protracted conflict.To test this hypothesis we conducted two studies in which we examined the relationship between anger and the willingness to engage in positive risk-taking and support non-violent policies in the context of political negotiations between adversaries. Results indicate a significant positive relationship, supporting the hypothesis that anger is not an exclusively militant emotion, and its effects are situationally dependent.     

An aggression machine: IV. Concurrent and predictive validity over ten years

The subjects (60 boys) were drawn from the sample of a longitudinal study of social development to represent extremely aggressive, anxious, constructive, and submissive patterns of behaviour at the age of 8. A year later they were tested with an aggression machine (PAM). This allows variation of the intensity of both aggressive attack and defence in different stimulus conditions. The intensity of defensive aggression towards different attackers as well as the response style variables, latency, duration, and number of responses were correlated with observed and self-reported data at the ages of 8, 9, 14 and 19. The results showed that the intensity of aggression toward a same-sex peer had the highest validity. Opposite sex and authority figures as attackers called up other associations and motives, such as conflicts with the mother and anxiety. From the response style variables the highest validity was obtained for reaction time. This correlated with constructive behaviour.     

Negative intergroup contact and support for social policies toward the minority outgroup in the aftermath of a natural disaster

In this field study, we tested whether negative intergroup contact experienced by majority (Italian) survivors in the aftermath of the earthquakes that struck Northern Italy in 2012 was associated with policy attitudes toward minority (immigrant) survivors. Results revealed a negative association between negative contact and support for social policies aimed at favoring immigrant survivors. Moreover, social policies toward immigrant survivors mediated the effect of negative contact on social policy attitudes toward the minority group as a whole. We discuss the theoretical and practical implications of findings.     

Vicarious intergroup contact and the role of authorities in prejudice reduction

The present study focuses on the effect of vicarious intergroup contact and the support of an authority figure on the improvement of outgroup and meta-stereotype evaluations. Meta-stereotype refers to the shared beliefs of ingroup members about how they consider outgroup members to perceive their group. Three preliminary studies were carried out to determine desirable and undesirable characteristics for a good basketball performance, the task that best demonstrates the application of these characteristics, and the two groups (basketball teams) that should be involved in the vicarious intergroup contact. Fans of one of the basketball teams participated in the current study. Vicarious intergroup contact improved outgroup and meta-stereotype evaluations as compared with a no contact condition. In addition, the positive effects of vicarious intergroup contact significantly increased when it was supported by an authority figure. More importantly, our study also shows that the improvement of outgroup evaluation was partially mediated by changes on meta-stereotypes.     

Social dominance‐based threat reactions to immigrants in need of assistance

The present investigation examined how individuals higher in social dominance orientation (SDO) react to experimentally induced intergroup threat in terms of support for helping immigrants. Participants read editorials describing an incoming immigrant outgroup posing realistic threats (to tangible resources and well‐being), symbolic threats (to values and traditions) or no threats. Participants higher in SDO exhibited greater resistance to helping immigrants upon exposure to realistic, symbolic, (Experiments 1 and 2), or combined realistic–symbolic (Experiment 2) intergroup threats, but not when the same immigrants posed no threats. In Experiment 2, SDO exerted indirect effects on modern prejudice through both heightened infra‐humanization and intergroup anxiety, with modern prejudice itself predicting greater resistance and indifference to helping immigrants. Moderated mediation analyses revealed strongest SDO‐infra‐humanization relations under conditions of symbolic threat. Implications for prejudice‐reduction interventions are considered. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Social Categorization and the Perception of Groups and Group Differences

The classification of human beings into distinct groups is a fundamental feature of social perception. Problematic phenomena, such as prejudice, discrimination, and intergroup conflict, are commonly traced back to categorization. We explore the minimal conditions under which categorization occurs and the basic mechanisms by which it affects cognition and behavior. We show that comparisons between groups are not necessary for categorization, reveal the conditions under which people overestimate or underestimate differences between groups, and sketch a model showing how social categorization gives rise to differences in the evaluation of ingroups and outgroups and to differences in the accuracy of judgments of ingroups and outgroups. We conclude with reflections on intergroup conflict and the role of moral judgment in such conflicts.     

Do the right thing! A study on social representation of obedience and disobedience

The present research is aimed at investigating through a mixed-method approach the dimensions underlying the psychosocial constructs of obedience, disobedience and the relations between them. To this end, we consider the attitudes toward (dis)obedience being socially constructed, and we chose the theory of social representations (Abric, 2003; Moscovici, 1961) as the theoretical framework of this study.The data, collected on a sample of 190 individuals, allowed us to define these social objects, reducing both their complexity and polysemy.Obedience and disobedience were both seen by research participants as context-dependent behaviours, neither positive nor negative, per se. Also, both related to the concept of authority (individuals, institutions, and society). However, while obedience was mostly considered an uncritical response to laws, social norms or physical authorities, disobedience was defined as an active, conscious line of conduct. Theoretical and practical implications of these findings are discussed.     

Attribution of Responsibility and Trust in the Milgram Obedience Experiment1

The two primary theoretical explanations for the findings of the Milgram (1963, 1974) obedience studies are that of Milgram, stressing the role of relinquished responsibility to the authority on the one hand, and that of Mixon (1971, 1972), for whom trust in the experimenter is the key element on the other hand. The aim of the 2 studies reported in this article, using edited portions of the film Obedience (Milgram, 1965), was to explore the naive social perceiver's understanding of the dynamics of obedience to authority through his or her attributions about responsibility and trust, and thereby to provide some input into the theoretical controversy between Milgram and Mixon. Both studies were more supportive of Milgram's than of Mixon's position.     

Living in a multicultural world: Intergroup ideologies and the societal context of intergroup relations

In a relatively short time span, issues of ethnic, cultural, and religious diversity have become central topics of discussion in various nations. As a result, the role of broad ideologies that frame and structure relations between groups has received increasing attention by social psychologists. Of particular concern has been the role of these intergroup ideologies in promoting intergroup harmony and reducing prejudice. In this article, we appraise the evidence related to three main intergroup ideologies, assimilation, colourblindness, and multiculturalism. We argue that research in this area has paid insufficient attention to the social and political context. Intergroup ideologies have been studied and conceptualised as being located solely within individual minds. We suggest that the potentially vital aspect of these ideologies is that they are sometimes widely shared by members of a social group. Integrating sociological and political analyses, we discuss the fact that intergroup ideologies are institutionalised as policies and that, as such, they often vary across countries and across time. We present a series of studies to illustrate the theoretical implications of studying the shared nature of these intergroup ideologies, providing insights into the question of when and why national policies can shape individuals’ intergroup attitudes and beliefs and improve intergroup relations.     

The role of the self-concept and the social context in determining the behavior of power holders: self-construal in intergroup versus dyadic dispute resolution negotiations

In this work, the authors explored how a person's view of himself or herself might determine his or her use of power in a complex dispute resolution negotiation. In 3 studies of asymmetric power in negotiations, the authors demonstrated that the impact of power on motivation and behavior is moderated by both a person's self-view and the social context. In Study 1, the results revealed that in a one-on-one dispute, powerful individuals primed to hold an interdependent (as opposed to independent) self-construal are more generous in resolving their disputes with low-powered opponents. Study 2 replicated this finding but revealed a different pattern in intergroup disputes, in which powerful interdependent teams of negotiators are actually less generous than are independent teams. Study 3 provided a conceptual replication of Study 2, with the use of chronic measures of self-construal and self-reported measures of behavior. Results suggest that an interdependent self-construal may lead to a more benevolent use of power in dyadic conflicts but more exploitive uses of power in intergroup conflicts. Implications for the understanding of power and self-construal are discussed.