Resistance to social influence

• AO1 - resistance to conformity

  • Pressure to conform can be resisted if other people are not conforming.
  • Asch’s research showed that the dissenter doesn’t have to give the ‘right‘ answer.
  • The fact that someone is not following the majority is social support - it allows others to follow their own conscience.
  • The dissenter shows that the majority is no longer unanimous.
• AO1 - resistance to obedience

  • Pressure to obey can be resisted if another person is seen to disobey.
  • In one of Milgram’s variations, the rate of obedience dropped from 65% to 10% when a disobedient confederate was present.
  • They allowed the participants to act from their own conscience.
  • A disobedient model challenges the legitimacy of the authority figure.
• AO1 - internal LOC

  • Rotter proposed locus of control (LOC).
  • Some people have an internal LOC where they believe things that happen to them are largely controlled by themselves.
• AO1 - external LOC

  Some people have an external LOC where they believe things that happen are outside their control.
• AO1 - continuum


  • LOC is a scale and people vary their position on it.
  • High externals at one end of the continuum and high internals on the other end.
  • Low internals and low externals lie in between.
• AO1 - resisting pressures to obey or conform

  • People with internal LOC are more likely to resist pressures to obey or conform.
  • People with internal LOC are more self-confident and have higher intelligence, both traits that lead to greater resistance to social influence.
• AO3 - ✔️evidence for the role of support in resisting conformity.


  • An 8 week programme to help pregnant adolescents aged 14-19 resist pressure to smoke, social support was given by an older ‘buddy’.
  • At the end of the programme, children who had a buddy was significantly less likely to smoke than a control group of participants who didn’t have a buddy.
  • Shows that social support can help young people resist social influences in real world situations.
• AO3 - ✔️evidence for the role of support of dissenting peers


  • Researchers asked participants to produce evidence that would be used to help an oil company run a smear campaign.
  • The researcher found higher levels of resistance in their study than Milgrams, this may be because participants were in groups.
  • 88% rebelled against their orders.
  • Shows how supporters can undermine legitimacy of authority and reduce obedience.
• AO3 - ✔️evidence to support the role of LOC in resisting obedience 


  • A researcher repeated Milgram’s baseline study and measured whether the participants were internals or externals.
  • 37% of internals didn’t continue to the highest shock level, whereas only 23% of externals didn’t continue.
  • Internals showed greater resistance to authority in a Milgram-type situation.
  • Shows that resistance is at least partly related to LOC, which increases the validity of LOC as an explanation of disobedience.
• AO3 - ✖️not all research supports the role of LOC in resistance 


  • A researcher analysed data from American LOC studies over 40 years, showing that people became more resistant to obedience but also more external.
  • This is surprising as if resistance is linked to an internal LOC we would expect people to have become more internal.
  • Therefore LOC may not be a valid explanation of resistance to social influence.