Revisitando el concepto de la banalidad del mal desde la perspectiva del liderazgo de identidad

Jesús M. Canto; Macarena Vallejo-Martín

doi:10.24310/espsiescpsi.v13i1.10080

Autores/as

Jesús M. Canto Universidad de Málaga, España España https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8139-0896
Macarena Vallejo-Martín Universidad de Málaga, España España

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.24310/espsiescpsi.v13i1.10080

Palabras clave:

agencia, obediencia, rol, liderazgo, identidad social

Resumen

El concepto de la banalidad del mal ha sido utilizado para explicar la maldad humana. Este concepto ha sido muy influyente en la psicología social y en el resto de las ciencias sociales. Los resultados obtenidos en los experimentos de Milgram sobre obediencia y en el experimento de la prisión de Stanford (EPS) han sido considerados como muestras de apoyo empírico al concepto de la banalidad del mal. Pero este concepto está recibiendo importantes críticas desde la historia y desde la propia psicología social. El reanálisis de los estudios de Milgram y del EPS no apoya las formulaciones teóricas clásicas formuladas por Milgram y Zimbardo. La variabilidad de los niveles de obediencia en los experimentos de Milgram y en el comportamiento mostrado por los guardias y prisioneros en el EPS requieren otro modelo teórico explicativo de tales resultados. Enmarcados dentro de la perspectiva de la identidad social, Haslam y Reicher proponen que el papel del liderazgo de identidad es un concepto clave para explicar los resultados obtenidos en estos estudios.

Descargas

Los datos de descargas todavía no están disponibles.

Métricas

Cargando métricas ...

Citas

Adorno, T. W., Frenkel-Brunswik, E., Levinson, D. & Sanford, N. (1950). The authoritarian personality. Nueva York: Harper.

Allport, F. H. (1924). Social psychology. Boston. Houghton & Mifflin.

Allport, G. W. (1954). The nature of prejudice. Cambridge, MA: Perseus Books.

Álvaro, J. L. & Garrido, A. (2003). Psicología social. Perspectivas psicológicas y sociológicas. Madrid: McGraw Hill.

Arendt, H. (1963). Eichmann in Jerusalem: A report on the banality of evil. Nueva York: Penguin.

Banuazizi, A. & Movahedi, S. (1975). Interpersonal dynamics in a simulated prison: A methodological analysis. American Psychologist, 30, 152-160. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0076835

Bandura, A. (2006). Toward a psychology of human agency. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 1, 164-180. https://doi.org/10.1037/e416902005-796

Blass, T. (2004). The man who shocked the world: The life and legacy of Stanley Milgram. Nueva York: Basic Books.

Burger, J. M., Girgis, Z. M. & Manning, C. M. (2011). In their own words: Explaining obedience to authority through an examination of participants’ comments. Social Psychological & Personality Science, 2, 460-466. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550610397632

Canto, J. M. (2019). Psicología de los grupos. Málaga: Aljibe.

Canto, J. M. y Álvaro, J. L. (2015). Más allá de la obediencia: Reanálisis de la investigación de Milgram. Escritos de Psicología, 8, 13-20. https://doi.org/10.5231/psy.writ.2015.0701

Cesarani, D. (2004). Eichmann: His life and crimes. Londres: Heinemann.

Fromm, E. (1973). The anatomy of human destructiveness. Nueva York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

Gamson, W. B., Fireman, B. & Rytina, S. (1982). Encounters with unjust authority. Hounwood, IL: Dorsey Press.

Griggs, R. (2014). Coverage of the Stanford Prison Experiment in introductory psychology textbooks. Teaching of Psychology, 41, 195-203. https://doi.org/10.1177/0098628314537968

Haney, C., Banks, C. & Zimbardo, P. (1973). Interpersonal dynamics in a simulated prison. International Journal of Criminology and Penology, 1, 69-97. https://doi.org/10.21236/ad0751041

Haslam, S. A. & Reicher, S. (2007). Beyond the banality of evil: Three dynamics of an interactionist social psychology of tyranny. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 33, 615-622. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167206298570

Haslam, S. A. & Reicher, S. (2012). When prisoners take over the prison: A social psychology of resistance. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 16, 154-179. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868311419864

Haslam, S. A. & Reicher, S. (2017). 50 years of “obedience to authority”: From blind obedience to engaged followership. Annual Review of Law and Social Science, 13, 59-78. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-lawsocsci-110316-113710

Haslam, S. A., Reicher, S. & Birney, M. E. (2014). Nothing by mere authority: Evidence that in an experimental analogue of the Milgram paradigm participants are motivated not by orders but by appeals to science. Journal of Social Issues, 70, 473-488. https://doi.org/10.1111/josi.12072

Haslam, S. A., Reicher, S., Millard, K. & McDonald, R. (2015). “Happy to have been service”: The Yale archive as a window into the engaged followership of participants in Milgram’s “obedience” experiments. British Journal of Social Psychology, 54, 55-83. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12074

Haslam, S. A., Reicher, S. & Platow, M. (2011). The new psychology of leaderships: Identity, influence and power. Nueva York: Psychology Press.

Haslam, S. A., Reicher, S., & Van Bavel, J. J. (2019). Rethinking the nature of cruelty: The role of identity leadership in the Stanford Prison Experiment. American Psychologist, 74, 809-822. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/b7crx

Koonz, K. (2003). The Nazi conscience. New Haven, CT: Harvard University Press.

Le Texier, T. (2018). Histoire d’un mensonge: Enquête sur l’experience de Stanford. Paris: Editions la Découverte.

Le Texier, T. (2019). Debunking the Stanford Prison Experiment. American Psychologist, 74, 823-839. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/mjhnp

Lewin, K. (1951). Field theory in social science. Nueva York: Harper.

Lovibon, S. H., Mithiran, X. & Adams, W. G. (1979). The effects of three experimental prison environments on the behaviour of non-convict volunteer subjects. Australian Psychologist, 14, 273-287. https://doi.org/10.1080/00050067908254355

Lozowick, Y. (2002). Hitler’s bureaucrats: The nazis security police and the banality of evil. Londres: Continuum.

Milgram S. (1963). Behavioral study of obedience. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 67, 371-378. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0040525

Milgram, S. (1974). Obedience to Authority: An experimental view. Nueva York: Harper and Row.

Moscovici, S. (1981). Psicología de las minorías activas. Madrid: Morata.

Munné, F. (1989). Entre el individuo y la sociedad. Marcos y teorías actuales sobre el comportamiento interpersonal. Barcelona: PPU.

Rees, L. (1997). The nazis: A warning from history. Londres: BBC Books.

Reicher, S. & Haslam, S. A. (2006). Rethinking the psychology of tyranny: The BBC Prison Study. British Journal of Social Psychology, 45, 1-40. https://doi.org/10.1348/014466605x81720

Reicher, S. & Haslam, S. A. (2012). Obedience. Revisiting Milgram’s shock experiments. En J. R. Smith & S. A. Haslam (Eds.), Social Psychology. Revisiting the classic studies (pp. 106-125). Londres: Sage.

Reicher, S., Haslam, S. A. & Hopkins, N. (2005). Social identity and the dynamics of leadership: Leaders and followers as a collaborative agents in the transformation of social reality. Leadership Quartely, 16, 547-568. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2005.06.007

Reicher, S., Haslam, S. A., Spears, R. & Reynolds, K. (2012). A social mind: The context of John Turner’s work and its influence. European Review of Social Psychology, 23, 344-385. https://doi.org/10.1080/10463283.2012.745672

Reicher, S., Haslam, S A. & Rath, R. (2008). Making a virtue of evil: A five-step social identity model of the development of collective hate. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 2/3, 1313-1344. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-9004.2008.00113.x

Reicher, S., Haslam, S. A. & Smith, J. R. (2012). Working towards the experimenter: reconceptualizing obedience within the Milgram paradigm as identification-based followership. Perspectives on Psychology Science, 7, 315-324. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691612448482

Reicher, S. & Hopkins, N. (2001). Self and nation. Londres: Sage.

Reicher, S., Hopkins, N., Levine, M., & Rath, R. (2005). Entrepreneurs of hate and entrepreneurs of solidarity: Social identity as a basis for mass communication. International Review of Red Cross, 87, 621-637. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1816383100184462

Russell, N. J. (2011). Milgram’s obedience to authority experiments: Origins and early evolution. British Journal of Social Psychology, 50, 140-162. https://doi.org/10.1348/014466610x492205

Smith, J. R. & Haslam, S. A. (2012). Social psychology. Revisiting classic studies. Londres: Sage.

Swann, W. B. & Jetten, J. (2019). Restoring agency to the human actor. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 12, 382-399. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691616679464

Tajfel, H. & Turner, J. C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. En W. G. Austin & S. Worchel (Eds.), The social psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 33-77). Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole.

Turner, J. C. (1981). Towards a cognitive redefinition of the social group. Cahiers de Psychologie Cognitive, 1, 93-118.

Turner, J. C. (1991). Social influence. Buckingham: Open University Press.

Turner, J. C. (2005). Explaining the nature of power: A three-process theory. European Journal of Social Psychology, 35, 1-22. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.244

Turner, J. C. & Haslam, S. A. (2001). Social identity, organization and leadership. En M. E. Turner (Ed.), Groups at work: Advances in theory and research (pp. 25-65). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Turner, J.C., Hogg, M. A., Oakes, P. J., Reicher, S. & Wetherell, M. S. (1987). Rediscovering the social group. A self-categorization theory. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.

Tyler, T. R. & Blader, S. L. (2003). The group engagement model: Procedural justice, social identity, and cooperative behaviour. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 7, 349-361. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327957pspr0704_07

Vetlesen, A. J. (2005). Evil and human agency: Understanding collective evildoing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Zimbardo, P. (1989). Quiet rage: The Stanford prison study [video]. Stanford, CA: Stanford University.

Zimbardo, P. (2004). A situacionist perspective on the psychologist of evil: Understanding how good people are transformed into perpetrators. En A. Miller (Ed.), The social psychology of good and evil (pp. 21-50). Nueva York: Guilford.

Zimbardo, P. (2008). El efecto Lucifer. El porqué de la maldad. Barcelona: Paidós.