Resistance to social influence

• What is the definition of resistance to social influence?

  Refers to 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).
• How does social support affect obedience and conformity?

  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 SI is possible.
• How can the pressure to conform be resisted?

  If there are others who don't conform. Simply the fact that someone else is not following the majority is social support. It enables the naive participant to be free to follow their own conscience. This is seen in Asch's unanimity variation when one other confederate was instructed to give the correct answer throughout and therefore did not conform to the majority. The rate of conformity dropped to 5% from its original 37%. The confederate acted as a model for independent behaviour. Their dissent gives rise to more dissent because it shows the majority is no longer anonymous.
• How can the pressure to obey be resisted? Give an example from one of Milgram's variation?

  If there is another person who is seen to disobey. In one of Milgram's variations, the rate of obedience dropped from 65% to 10% when the genuine participant was joined by a disobedient confederate. The participant may not follow the other persons disobedient behaviour yet their disobedience acts as a 'model' of dissent for the participant to copy and this frees him to act from his own conscious. The disobedient model challenges the legitimacy of the authority figure making it easier for others to disobey.
• Who proposed locus of control and what does it refer to?

  Julian Rotter 1966 proposed locus of control (LOC) as a concept concerned with internal control vs external control. LOC refers to the sense we each have about what directs events in our lives.
• What do people with an internal LOC believe vs those with an external LOC? (Give examples)

  People with an internal LOC believe that they are mostly responsible for what happens to them. For instance if you do well on an exam it is because you worked hard, if you don't do well it is because you didn't work hard. People with an external LOC believe it is mainly a matter of luck or outside forces (out of their control) that is responsible for what happens to them; so if they did well in an exam it may be because they used an excellent text book and if they failed they may blame the textbook or they had bad luck and the questions were hard.
• How is LOC a continuum?

  People are not just external or internal, LOC is a scale and individuals vary in position on it. High internal control is at one end of the continuum and high external at the other.
• What type of people on the LOC continuum are more able to resist social pressures to conform or obey and why?

  People with a high internal LOC as people who take responsibility for their own actions and experiences (as internals do), tend to base their decisions on their own beliefs rather than relying on the opinions of others.
• What is another explanation as to why those with a high internal LOC are more able to resist social pressures to conform or obey?

  These people tend to be more self-confident, more achievement oriented and have higher intelligence. These traits lead to greater resistance to social influence. These are also the characteristics of leaders, who have much less need for social approval than followers.
• Why are people with a high external LOC less likely to resist social pressures to conform?

  They are more likely to be influenced by others because they don't believe they exercise personal control over their lives.
• AO3: strength, research support. How does Asch's research support social support as an explanation for resistance to social influence?

  There is evidence to support the idea of social support in helping people to resist social influence. In one of Asch's variations, unanimity, one of the confederates was instructed to give the correct answer throughout. In this variation the rate of conformity dropped to 5% from its original 37%. This demonstrates that if the real participant has support for their belief (social support), then they're more likely to resist the pressure to conform.
• AO3: strength, further research support. How does Milgram's research support social support as an explanation for obedience?

  In one of Milgram's variations, the genuine participant was joined by a disobedient confederate who also played the role of teacher. The disobedient confederate refused to go on with giving shocks to the learner, Mr Wallace, and withdrew from the experiment early. This variation caused obedience levels to drop to 10% from its original 65%. This supports the idea that pressure to obey can be resisted if there is another person who is seen to disobey as it can help others to do the same, increasing the validity of social support as an explanation for resistance to social influence.
• AO3: strength, describe the research evidence that supports a link between LOC and resistance to obedience?

  Holland repeated Milgram's baseline study and measured whether participants were externals or internals. He found that 37% of internals did not continue to the highest shock level (they showed some resistance) whereas only 23% of externals did not continue. In other words, internals showed greater resistance to authority in a Milgram- type situation. This shows that resistance is at least partly related to LOC, which increases LOC as an explanation of disobedience.
• AO3: limitation, limited role of LOC. What did Rotter point out about LOC?

  Rotter pointed out that LOC is not necessarily the most important factor in determining whether or not someone resists social influence. LOC's role depends on the situation and only significantly affects their behaviour in new situations. If you have conformed or obeyed in a specific situation in the past, the chances are you will do so again whether or not you have a high internal or external LOC. This suggests that even though studies suggest (Holland) that those with an internal LOC is linked with being able to resist social influence it is not the only explanation for why people may or may not resist social influence, therefore limiting it as an explanation.
• Who did research supporting the link between LOC and resistance to obedience? What were his findings?

  Charles Holland. Findings: 37% of internals did not continue to the highest shock levels and 23% of externals did not continue. In other words, internals showed greater resistance to authority in a Milgram type situation.