Resistance to social influence

• Resistance to Social Influence- Social Support

  Conformity

  Social support can help people resist conformity. Pressure to conform can be reduced if there are others who are not conforming. Asch's research shows that the presence of a dissenter (someone else not following the majority) enables a person to be free to follow their own conscious.
• Resistance to Social Influence- Social Support 2

  Obedience

  Social support can help people resist obedience. Pressure to obey can be reduced if there is another person who disobeys. In one of Milgram's variations, the rate of obedience dropped from 65% to 10% when the genuine ppt was joined by a disobedient confederate. Their disobedience acts as a 'model' for ppt to copy that frees them to act from their own conscious.
• Resistance to Social Influence- Social Support

  evaluation

  Supported by research. Allen and Levine (1971) found that conformity decreased when there was one dissenter in an Asch-type study. Occurred even if the dissenter wore thick glasses and said he had difficulty w/ his vision (clearly in no position to judge the length of the lines). Supports that resistance is not just motivated by following what someone else says but enables someone to be free from group pressure.
• Resistance to Social Influence- Social Support

  evaluation 2

  Supported by research. Gamson et al (1982) found higher levels of resistance to obedience than Milgram. This was probably because ppts were in groups (had to produce evidence that would help an oil company run a smear campaign). 29 out of 33 groups rebelled. Shows that peer support is linked to greater resistance.
• Resistance to Social Influence- Locus of Control (LOC)

  Rotter (1966) proposed concept- concerned w/ internal control versus external control. Internals believe that the things that happen to them are largely controlled by themselves (e.g., did well on a test = worked hard). Externals believe things happen w/out their own control (e.g., did well on exam = good luck)
• Resistance to Social Influence- Locus of Control (LOC) 2

  There is a continuum w/ high internal LOC at one end and high external LOC at the other, w/ low internal and low external lying in between.
• Resistance to Social Influence- Locus of Control (LOC)

  Internal LOC = more likely to be able to resist pressures to conform or obey. If a person takes personal responsibility for their actions and experiences, they are more likely to base their decisions on their own beliefs and thus resist pressure from others. Another explanation for link between greater resistance and internal LOC tend to be more self-confident, achievement orientated, intelligent and less needing of social approval.
• Resistance to Social Influence- Locus of Control (LOC)

  evaluation 1

  Research evidence supports link between LOC and resistance to obedience. Holland (1967) repeated Milgram's study and measured whether ppts were internals or externals. Found 37% internals did not continue to highest shock, whereas only 23% of externals did not continue. Internals showed greater resistance to authority. Increases validity of LOC explanation.
• Resistance to Social Influence- Locus of Control (LOC)

  evaluation 2

  Contradictory research. Twenge et al. (2004) analysed data from American LOC studies over 40 years (1960-2002). Data showed that over time span, people have become more resistant to obedience but also more external. If resistance linked to internal LOC, we would expect people to have become more internal. Challenges links.