Resistance of Social Influence

• What is Resistance to Social Influence?


  the ability to withstand a social pressure to conform to the majority or obey authority.

  This ability to withstand social pressure is influenced by dispositional and situational factors.
• What is social support?


  the pressure to conform is resisted if others aren't conforming at that present moment.
• One example of social support:

  Asch's unanimity study-

  • another confederate (a lone dissenter) was added to the group
  • the lone dissenter would either support the naïve participant or no agree with anyone in the room
  • when the lone dissenter gave the answer that supported the naïve participant the conformity dropped to 5.5% (social support - because they didn't conform)
• Second example of social support:


  Milgram's two rebel study -

  • another teacher (confederate) was brought in and refused to administer shocks
  • the obedience dropped from 65% to 10%
  • the disobedience acts as a model of dissent for the participant to copy & freeing them from his own conscience - challenging the legitimacy of authority (figure)
• What is an internal locus of control?


  an internal locus of control believes that things happen because of their own behavior and their control
• what is an external locus of control?


  an external locus of control believes that things happen to them are cause by things outside of their control
• what are the characteristics of a high internal locus of control?


  characteristics:

  • take responsibility
  • base decisions on personal experiences/beliefs & NOT the opinion of others
  • more self confident, more achievement orientated & more intelligent
• One strength of resistance to social influence


  real world research - Albrecht et al 2006

  -> evidence shows positive effects of social support

  • Teen Fresh Start USA- 8 week program to help pregnant adolescents age 14-19 resist the peer pressure to smoke
  • social support was provided by an older mentor 'buddy' - depending on the condition
  • those with social support were less likely to smoke than the control group

  this suggests that social support is a valid explanation for SI
• second strength of resistance to social influence

  research support for social support - Asch 1951 variations

  • lone dissenter (confederate) was introduced into the group, giving the correct answer throughout
  • conformity dropped to 5.5% because the real participant had social support in their answers
  • so they are more likely to resist the pressure to conform
• second strength of resistance to social influence

  part 2: Milgram 1974 variation -

  • real participant as paired with 2 additional 'teachers' (confederates)
  • the 2 additional 'teachers' refused to go on with the rest of the study (shocking someone)
  • the percentage of people who continued all the way to 450V dropped to 10% from 65%
  • this shows that if the participant had social support to disobey then they would most likely resist the pressure of an authority figure
• conclusion from second strength of resistance to SI


  in Asch and Milgram's research it is suggested that an individual that has social support, then they are likely to resist the pressure.
• one strength of LOCin resistance to SI

  research support- Holland 1967:

  • evidence of a link between LOC and resistance to obedience
  • repeated milgram's baseline study and measured if the people were internal or external locus of control
  • findings: 37% of internals didn't continue to the highest shock level and 23% of externals didn't continue to the highest shock level

  -> showing overall that ILOC have a higher resistance to social influence
• limited role of LOC - resistance to SI


  research support - Oliner & Oliner 1988:

  • ILOC are more likely to resist social pressure to obey
  • interviewed non-Jewish survivors of the Holocaust (WW II) & interviewed those who resisted orders to protect the Jewish people