The Psychology of Obedience: Exploring Authority and Morality

Why are humans obedient to authority? What makes a person follow rules or laws even if it goes against their own morals or conscience? There are many reasons for obedience, and one of the most significant is fear of consequences. When people fear punishment or societal disapproval, people often obey the rules, even at the expense of their own beliefs.

The Psychology of Obedience

One of the simplest reasons people obey is the Mere Exposure Effect. The theory that individuals choose obedience because they have been exposed to it. Suggesting that psychological obedience is created environmentally. If they see their parents and friends as obedient people, they are more like to be obedient too.

Lack of reliable information can be a big reason. Without other reliable sources of information, people are forced to rely only on the claims of the authority figure.

Fear. When people are scared and unsure of what to do, their fears can make them more easily manipulated by authoritarian leaders.

Agentic State

The Agentic State is a state of mind people enter which influences their obedience. This is a psychological state of being an agent of the rules, giving up their moral responsibility and autonomy. This allows people blame those who gave the orders, rather than blaming themselves for following the orders, especially when the orders are not agreeable.

An example of this psychological state is seen in those who commit war crimes. This phenomenon was first noticed by psychologists during the Nuremberg Trials of Nazi officers who worked under Hitler. The Nazi officers would say “I was only following orders” as an excuse to justify their part in these crimes.

The agentic state allowed them to hide behind their superiors and genuinely believed they were blameless, despite carrying out monstrous acts. By convincing themselves that they wouldn’t be to blame, they were much more likely to obey no matter the order.

Research from the University of St. Andrews in Scotland suggests that human obedience to orders is not solely in response to authority but an individual must also have strong ideological links to the authority figure and agree with the orders being given to them. For instance with the example of the Nazi officers, they wouldn’t have obeyed orders if they didn’t agree with Hitler that Jews should be exterminated. They may have a problem with the way in which it is done but not the end result.

These extreme cases of obedience are not instant. It doesn’t happen overnight and involves gradual compliance. People are more likely to comply with extreme orders if they are introduced slowly. The desire to fit in and follow social norms also play into this.

The Nuremberg Trials, defendants in their dock: Goering, Hess, von Ribbentrop, and Keitel in front row,
Donitz, Raeder, von Schirach, and Sauckel in back row, circa 1945-1946, public domain.

Modern Day

A modern example that encompasses both the Mere Exposure Effect and the Agentic State is Israel’s occupation of Palestine. In Israel, military service is compulsory, meaning that every citizen must serve in the army. This creates a society where obedience to authority is not only common but expected—military service is ingrained as a social norm. Over time, when individuals grow up exposed to this expectation and through constant exposure to authority figures, such as military leaders and government officials, obedience becomes the default behavior.

The Mere Exposure Effect plays a role here because people in Israel are continuously exposed to the idea of military service as a part of life and this normalization leads to widespread compliance. Additionally, the Agentic State comes into play when soldiers carry out orders that may harm others but justify their actions by placing the blame on higher authority.

Given the highly structured nature of military orders, soldiers may feel less personally responsible for actions carried out during service, as they are “just following orders,” much like the Nazi officers during WWII.

It is rare for individuals to question or reject social norms because they fear repercussions for refusing service or defying authority. The fear of facing societal or legal consequences discourages any change from the accepted behaviors. This creates an environment where disobedience becomes not just rare but socially and legally dangerous. The combination of societal expectation and the shift in responsibility to higher authority shapes much of the obedience in Israel’s military culture.

In modern times it can be difficult to understand how human obedience to authority is still an issue, but it is due to a mix of psychological factors and the influence of authority figures. Whether in historical examples like the actions of Nazi officers or modern-day situations such as the Israeli Defense Forces, individuals are often more likely to follow orders when they feel detached from personal responsibility or when they are conditioned by society. Recognizing and acknowledging how authority can shape human behavior helps to ensure that people critically evaluate the systems of power that help to influence their decisions. The world depends on it.