Resistance to social influence

• social support

  presence of people who resist pressures to conform or obey can help others do the same.
• resisting conformity

  pressure to conform can be restricted when there are other people present who are not conforming.

  Seen in Asch's research

  Enables the naive participant to be free to follow their own conscience.

  Confederate acts as a 'model' of independent behaviour
• resisting obedience


  pressure to obey can be resisted if there is another person who is seen to disobey.

  seen in Milgram's variation which obedience dropped from 65% to 10% when participant was joined by a disobedient participant.

  acts as a model of 'dissent' and challenges the authority figure
• Strength - real-world research support

  Evidence for positive effects of social support.

  Albrecht et al

  Evaluated an 8 week programme to help pregnant adolescents resist peer pressure to smoke.

  Adolescents who had a buddy were significantly less likely to smoke than a control group who didn't have a buddy.
• Strength - research support for dissenting peers

  Gamson et al

  Participants told to produce evidence that would be used to help an oil company run a smear campaign.

  Researchers found higher levels of resistance than Milgram.

  Because participants were in groups so they could discuss.

  29/33 groups (88%) rebelled against orders.

  Shows peer support led to disobedience
• Locus of control

  refers to the sense we each have about what directs events in our lives.

  Internal LoC believe that they are mostly responsible for what happens to them.

  External LoC believe that it is mainly a matter of luck or other outside forces.

  LoC is a scale and people vary on it.
• LoC for resisting SI

  people with high internal LoC are more able to resist pressures to conform or obey as they take responsibility for their actions so are more likely to depend decisions on own beliefs.
• Strength - research support for LoC

  Holland

  Repeated Milgram's baseline study and measured whether participants were internal or external.

  37% of internals didn't continue to the highest shock level.

  23% of externals didn't continue to highest shock level.

  Internals had greater resistance.
• Limitation - contradictory research for LoC

  Twenge et al

  Analysed data from US LoC studies conducted over a 40 year period

  Data showed people became more resistant to obedience but more external over this time span.

  Suggests LoC is not a valid explanation.