Explanations Of Resistance To Social Influence AO3

• HOLLAND repeated Milgram's study and measured if they had an internal or external LOC (locus of control)
• 37 of internals stopped before 450 whereas only 23 of externals did, suggesting internals are less likely to obey
• SPECTOR used Rotter's LOC to investigate conformity - no difference for resistance to conformity, but those with an internal LOC were less likely to conform than those with an external LOC, however this was only in situations of normative social influence
• AVTGIS conducted a meta-analysis on studies of LOC and conformity and found a correlation of +0.37 for externals and conformity, suggesting there is support for the explanation, but only in part
• ALBRECHT researched Teen Fresh Start USA and found pregnant teenagers were more likely to resist peer pressure to smoke if they had an older 'buddy' who also resisted, suggesting social support can increase resistance to conforming in real-world situations
• In GAMSON's study, participants were instructed to help an oil company run a smear campaign and to argue than they were offended by the conduct of a station manager. Participants could confer and this support led to 24/33 groups rebelling - the legitimacy of the authority figure had been challenged
• Cooper thought gender may have an effect, with males more likely to resist social influence than females, but Eagly and Chrvala found that this was just in older people, and there was no difference between younger males and females, suggesting a complex mix of factors at play