Manipulations of perceived social rank affect the decision to engage in coercive interrogation

Torture and coercive practices are regarded as acceptable by approximately one in three adults globally in order to elicit confessions from suspects. Obedience to authority influences people’s willingness to inflict harm, yet little is known about the social rank of the person giving orders in the specific context of the possible use of torture. Here, we investigated the influence of interrogation method recommendations given by individuals of different social rank and the moderating effect of a person’s own moral stance on their endorsement of torture. Participants were randomly assigned to two conditions, in which non-coercive or severely coercive methods were recommended by individuals of either high or low rank. We hypothesised there would be significant differences between both interrogation method recommendations (either from high-/low-ranking individuals) and moral stance (utilitarian/deontological) and interrogation choices (severely coercive/non-coercive). We found that recommendations from high-ranking individuals significantly influenced participants’ interrogation choices, particularly when they endorsed severely coercive methods. In contrast, recommendations from low-ranking individuals had no significant effect on interrogation method choice. Additionally, morality played a role in participants’ choices, but even after controlling for moral stance, the effect of social rank prevailed. These findings suggest positions of authority matter in torture contexts and an over-emphasis on the opinions of high-ranking individuals may override a person’s individual moral stance.