Factors that modulate obedience to authority

The levels of obedience observed in Milgram's experiments were not constant but varied significantly depending on a variety of situational factors.

Analyzing these variations provides valuable insight into the conditions that increase or decrease people's propensity to obey authority figures, even when the orders are problematic.

Proximity and Legitimacy of the Authority Figure

The physical proximity of the authority figure influenced obedience.

When the experimenter gave orders by telephone rather than being present in the same room, obedience levels decreased considerably.

Also, the perceived legitimacy of the authority was crucial.

Whether the experiment was moved from the prestigious Yale University to a less imposing office building, or whether the experimenter was replaced with a person perceived as less authoritarian (e.g., another "participant"), obedience also decreased.

Proximity of the Victim

Emotional and physical distance from the victim (the "learner") also affected obedience.

In the standard condition, the "master" did not see the "learner" but did hear his or her complaints.

When proximity was increased (for example, if the "master" and "learner" were in the same room, or if the "master" had to physically place the "learner's" hand on a plate to receive the shock), obedience levels decreased.

Making the victim's suffering visible made it difficult to continue the harmful behavior.

Presence of Dissenters or Models of Disobedience

One of the most powerful factors in reducing obedience was the presence of others "teachers" (the experimenter's accomplices) who refused to continue the experiment.

When participants saw others challenge authority, they felt more capable of doing the same, and obedience plummeted.

This highlights the importance of disobedience mod