Resistance to social influence

• What is meant by resistance to social influence

  The ability of people to withstand the social pressure to conform to the majority or to obey authority.
• What are the two explanations of ‘resistance to social influence’

  social support and Locus of Control (LOC)
• what is suggested by social support (AO1)

  • The presence of people who resist pressures to conform or obey can help others to do the same.
  • These people act as models to show others that resistance to social influence is possible.
  • In other words - if you see someone else not obeying, it will give you the confidence to do the same.
• How does social support link to conformity

  The pressure to conform can be reduced if there are other people present who are not conforming
• How is social support seen in Milgrams study of obidence

  • Resistence has shown that individuals are generally more confident in their ability to resist temptations to obey if they have an ally willing to join them.
  • Milgrams variation - rate of obedience dropped from 65% to 10% when the real participant was joined by a disobedient
  • By exposing people to the actions of disobedient models encourages disobedience
• How does Asches study show social support in conformity

  • In asch’s research the person not conforming doesn’t have to be giving the ‘right’ answer but just having someone who is not following the majority allows another person to be free to follow their conscience - the other person acts as a “model”.
  • However, Asch’s research shows that when the “non-conforming“ person starts conforming again, so does the naive participant, thus showing the effect of conformity does not last long.
• (AO3) Research to support social support

  • Allen and Levine (1971) found independence creased with one dissenter in Asche-type study.
  • Even if the dissenter wore thick-lensed glasses and said he had problems with his vision
  • Resistance is not motivated by following what some else says but it enables some to be free of the pressures from the group
• (AO3) Social support: Importance of response order

  In condition 1:

  • Confederate answered first (giving the right answer), followed by the other 3 (giving the wrong answer), then the naïve participant.

  Condition 2:

  • 3 confederates (gave the wrong answer), followed by 1 confederate (giving right answer), then naïve participant.

  The naïve participants always answered at the end, but support was significantly more effective when the right answer was given in position 1 than 4.

  The first correct answer, confirms the participants own judgement, which produces initial commitment to the correct response.
• (AO3) one strength is that there is research support for resistence to obedience

  • In one of Milgram’s variations, the real participant was paired with two additional confederates, who also played the role of teachers.
  • In this variation, the 2 additional confederates refused to go on and withdrew from the experiment early.
  • In this variation, percentage of real participants who proceeded to the full 450 volts, dropped from 65% to 10%.

  This shows that if the real participant has support for their desire to disobey, then they are more likely to resist the pressure of an authority figure.
• What is the Locus of control

  An explanation proposed by Rotter which refers to how much a person believes they have control over themselves and their world
• Individuals with a High locus control are less likely to be led by conformity or through obedience and thus resist social influences
• what are the two types of locus of control

  internal and external
• what do people with high internal LOC believe

  • They are mostly responsible for what happens to them
  • It is their choices and their decisions that result in their behaviour
• What do people with high external LOC belive

  • Things happen without their own control
  • Things happen due to fate/luck
• summarise internal locus control and why they are less likely to conform

  • Internal locus of control makes individuals more resistant to social pressure (won’t conform/obey).
  • This is because they see themselves as being in control and are more likely to see themselves as having a choice as to whether they conform/obey.
• (AO3) One strength is that there is research support for LOC.

  • Holland repeated Milgrams study and measured whether participants were internals or externals.
  • 37% of internals did not continue to the highest shock level (showing independence)
  • However, only 23% of externals did not continue.

  As internals show greater Resistence to authority - this increases the validity of the LOC explanation and its explanatory power.
• (AO3) Another strength is that there is real life support for the locus of control

  Oliner & Oliner (1998) interviewed non-Jewish survivors of WWII and compared those who had resisted orders and protected Jewish people from the Nazi’s, in comparison to those who had not.

  •They found : 406 ‘rescuers’, who had resisted orders, were more likely to have a high internal locus of control, in comparison to the 126 people who had simply followed orders.

  •These results appear to support the idea that a high internal locus of control makes individuals less likely to follow orders.
• (AO3) one limitation is that the role of LOC in resisting social influence may be seen as exaggerated

  •Rutter (1982) suggested LOC only comes into play in new situations.

  •It has very little influence over our behaviours in familiar situations, where our previous experiences will be more important.

  This point is often overlooked when discussing LOC and resistance.