Names/ studies

• Rotter proposed the concept of locus of control a concept concerned with internal vs external
• Holland: Repeated Milgram's study and measured whether PPs were internals or externals

  37% of internals did not continue to highest shock level (showed independence)

  only 23% of externals did not continue

  77% externals obedient

  63% internals obedient
• Twenge: analysed data from American obedience studies over a 40 year period (1960-2002). Data showed that over this time span, people have become more resistant to obedience but more external
• Rotter: Found LOC is only important in new situations - it has little influence in familiar situations where previous experiences are always more important
• Asch: found that conformity reduced to 5.5% when one of the confederates gave a different answer to the rest of the group - social support breaks the unanimous position of the majority
• Milgram: Obedience dropped from 65% to 10% when the genuine PPs were joined by a disobedient confederate

  social support -people are more confident to resist obedience if they can find an ally who is willing to join them
• Allen and Levine: Found independence increased with one dissenter in an Asch-type study. Even if the dissenter wore thick glasses and said he had problems with his vision

  conformity
• What did Allen and Levine's findings show?

  Having a dissenter breaks unanimity meaning the genuine PP has an ally - this work supports social support

  Shows that resistance is not motivated by following what someone else says but it enables someone to be free of the pressure from the group
• Gamson et al: found higher levels of resistance in their study than Milgram. This was probably because they were in groups and had to produce a smear campaign for an oil company against activists. 29/33 of the groups of PPs (88%) rebelled
• What does Gamson's work show?

  That peer support is linked to greater resistance