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. 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

In the name of democracy: Disobedience and value-oriented citizenship

Recently, some scholars have highlighted a paradoxical phenomenon existing in democratic systems:Those people who show the greatest support for democracy are also those most willing to protestagainst the authority and to question it. However, if we consider the tasks of contemporary democraticcitizenship in a social-psychological perspective, this apparent paradox becomes understandable.Obedience to authority may ensure the continuity of social and group life, but disobedience may becrucial in stopping the authority relationship from degenerating into an authoritarian one. FollowingKelman and Hamilton's analysis of legitimacy dynamics, we consider how actions of disobediencemay serve the defence of democracy. In particular, by considering the different ways in which peoplerelate to the political system, the relevance of so-called value-oriented citizens in supportingdemocracy will be considered.

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.

Disobeying an Illegitimate Request in a Democratic or Authoritarian System

Crimes of obedience in the form of illegal or immoral acts committed in response to orders from authority occur in many contexts. In particular, under some circumstances of threats, people can easily accept restrictions upon democratic procedures. Recent studies have underlined the role of legitimacy in understanding the authority relationship and the importance of evaluating the legitimacy of the request rather than the legitimacy of the authority in preventing the rise of authoritarianism. The purpose of this study was to verify if people respond differently when an illegitimate request is put forward by a democratic or an authoritarian authority. The results on 224 subjects confirmed that people tend to be more obedient when they perceive authorities as democratic, notwithstanding the legitimacy of their requests.

Avoiding crimes of obedience: A comparative study of the autobiographies of M. K. Gandhi, N. Mandela and M. L. King

This research aims to provide a contribution towards understanding how and why certain people can display disobedience behaviors, to overcome unjust situations, and withstand persecutions deployed by authority. The paper presents a hermeneutic content analysis of the autobiographical speeches and texts of Gandhi, M. L. King and Mandela. Our results show that parents' value orientation, experience of injustice during childhood and exploration of alternative viewpoints during adolescence play a crucial role in structuring prosocial disobedience. Findings show also that social responsibility and ingroup communication are important conditions for facing persecutions without dropping original goals.