Agency theory

agency theory is an explanation of obedience that states that we have two mindsets that enables us to operate on our own or with others - the autonomous and the agentic state.

In the autonomous state our behaviour is self-directed. We take responsibility for our actions and are more likely to exercise our personal understanding of right and wrong. We operate in this state when we are alone, with peers or with people we percieve to be lower than us in the social hierarchy

when meeting others one makes a fast judgement on where the other person stands in the social hierarchy and the extent to which they have legitimate authority (which is when they have a recognised right to give orders and enforce obedience) When confronted with a legitimate authority figure, we shift from the autonomous state to the agentic state - this is called the agentic shift

When we are in the agentic state we become the 'agent' of the authority figure, meaning that we believe we are acting on their behalf and therefore we are not responsible for our actions. This leads to following the authotity's orders feeling like there is no choice but to obey, ultimately leading to acts of destructive obedience.

in the agentic state people may experience symptoms of anxiety (such as nervous laughter which was observed in Milgram's studies) especially when obeying orders resulting harm - this is called moral strain. It's the conflicting morals and need to obey - leading to cognitive dissonance and defense mechanisms. (such as denial) However, for most people this is not enough to provoke defiance due to powerful binding factors (for example: buffers and gradual commitment)

A strength of Milgram's agency theory is that it is supported by his 1963 study. In this study he found that 100% of ppts would administer a shock of 300V to a confederate for making a mistake on alearning task and 65% would go all the way to 450V, beyond the shock labelled 'danger, extreme shock'. This supports Milgram's theory that in the face of legitimate authority people are likely to carry out orders, despite high levels of moral strain.

Gina perry (2012) questioned the validity of this experiment, saying that ppts saw through the deception. She examined archives of his study and the evidence reveals that many ppts questioned whether the shocks were real. This means that there was no moral consequence for the ppts (if they believed the shocks to be fake) and they therefore had no reason to disobey. Therefore Milgram's results lack internal validity, meaning that agency theory might not have sufficient evidence to have assumed accurate conclusions, meaning it cannot be applied to understanding obedience in real life situations.

A weakness of agency theory is that the agentic shift is not inevitable. Agency theory doesn't explain for the 35% in MIlgram's 1963 study that did not go all the way to 450V. This shows that despite all the experimenters being an obvious source of authority, a large portion of the sample remained autonomous. This demonstrates that some participants did consider themselves responsible for their actions. This means that agency theory is deterministic, not accounting for those that do not undergo the agentic shift and cannot explain for individual differences in why ppts did not obey despite the circumstances being the same for every ppt. Therefore, agency theory is an incomplete explanation of obedience and would need to be developed in order to be applied to explaining obedience in real life situations.

There are alternative ways to explain obedience, using a different theory, such as social identity theory (Steve Reicher et al 2012). This is using the concept of 'engaged followership' - meaning that people obey leaders who are seen to be part of their social group (the ingroup) , therefore the followers identify with the leader. And this theory claims that disobedience occurs when the followers fail to identify with the leader. This means that social identity theory can explain why people disobey, whereas agency theory can't. Therefore, agency theory is an incomplete explanation of obedience and perhaps social identity theory gives a more complete explanation of obdience as it includes disobedience

brief outline
autonomous state / supporting study (Milgram 1963) / CA (Gina Perry 2012)
agentic shift / deterministic
agentic state / different thgeory (social identity theory)
moral strain / application