Resistance to social influence

• Resistance to social influence

  The ability of people to withstand social pressure to 

  conform or obey authority.

  A person’s ability to do this is influenced by both situational and dispositional factors.

  If those who are around us are not conforming then we’re more likely to resist.
• Social support and Resisting conformity

  Having social support breaks unanimity of a majority, this allows us to see an alternative way instead of just conforming to the norms of the group.

  Social support = Role models for independent behaviour, also make you feel more vindicated for resisting.

  Example: Asch -  when participants were given an ally who gave right answer, conformity dropped to only 5%
• Social support and Resisting Obedience

  Social support can also act as role model for disobedience.

  The rest of the group can just copy the role model, which frees the rest of the group up from their own conscience.

  Having a disobedient role model therefore, challenges legitimacy of authority figures which makes it easier for the rest of the group to disobey. 

  Example: Milgram – disobedient ally – 10% obedience.
• Real-world research support

  Albrecht et al (2006)

  • Teen Fresh Start USA (8 week programme to help pregnant adolescents aged 14-19 resist peer pressure to smoke)
  • Social support provided to some – slightly older mentor (‘buddy’).
  • At end of programme, those with buddies 

  significantly less likely to smoke than control 

  group (no buddy).

  • Shows social support can help young people 

  resist social influences as part of intervention in real world.
• Historical events

  Rosenstrasse Protest (1943).

  • German women resisted soldiers’ orders to leave.
  • Social support from the women who gathered there.
  • Supported each other.
  • Showed how social support can result in 

  resistance in real life.
• Locus of control (dispositional)

  Rotter (1966)

  Suggested that people differ in their beliefs about whether the outcomes of their actions are dependent on what they do ( internal locus of control) or on event outside their personal control (external locus of control)
• Internal Locus of Control

  • What happens to you is largely a consequence of your own ability and effort. 
  • More likely to display independence in thought and behaviour

  Rely less on opinions of others and are better to resist social influence
• External Locus of control

  • Things just happen to me and have have no control
  • Passive approach
  • Take less personal responsibility for my actions and less likely to display independent behaviour

  More likely to accept influence of others
• What are the characteristics of high internals in relation to social influence?


  High internals actively seek useful information and rely less on others' opinions.
• How do high internals demonstrate self-efficacy and self-confidence?


  They have a greater sense of self-efficacy and self-confidence compared to others.
• In what way are high internals more likely to become leaders?


  They tend to be more achievement-oriented, which contributes to leadership potential.
• What was the outcome of the simulation of a prisoner-of-war camp regarding internals and externals?


  • Internals were better able to resist attempts by an interrogator to gain information.
  • The performance difference increased with the intensity of pressure.
• Who conducted the study on internals and externals in a prisoner-of-war camp simulation?

  Hutchins and Estey in 1978.
• What does the study by Hutchins and Estey (1978) suggest about the performance of internals under pressure?


  The performance difference between internals and externals increases with greater pressure.
• Limited role of LOC

  Rotter himself stated that locus of control was only a factor in the resistance of social influence (conformity and obedience) when in novel situations. 

  This suggests that there are other factors involved in the resistance to social influence that may have more effect/be more important