explanations for resistance to SI

Question 1

what are the two main explanations for resistance to social influence?

Answer 1

-social support
-locus of control

Question 2

what does resistance to social influence involve?

Answer 2

-disobedience
-non-conformity
(non conformity can occur in two ways - independence {lack of consistent movement towards/away from social expectancy} and anti-conformity {consistent movement away from conformity})

Question 3

how does social support explain conformity?

Answer 3

-the presence of others who dissent can be a source of defiance
-dissenters provide moral support, and represents a form of social support
-early social support is more influential

Question 4

research on social support and conformity

Answer 4

asch 1956 - if a dissenter answers correctly at the start of the study, conformity drops from 32% to 5.5%, but if its later in the study it drops to 8.5%

Question 5

how does social support explain obedience?

Answer 5

-disobedient models reduce unanimity of a group, making it easier for people to act independently
-disobedient models can be seen as a form of conformity, as they create a group norm for individuals to follow

Question 6

research on social support and obedience

Answer 6

-milgram 1974 - wehn 2 confederates paired with a real p left early, only 10% got to the maximum 450V shock

Question 7

what is locus of control?

Answer 7

a personality dimension identified by rotter
-says the extent to which people believe they can control events in their life can explain conformity and obedience
-rotter believed having a high internal locus of control made someone more resistant to social pressure

Question 8

what’s the difference between high internal and high external locus of control?

Answer 8

-high internal = people affect the outcomes of situations (eg choices)
-high external = believe things happen regardless of their actions (eg luck, fate)

Question 9

research on LoC and resisting conformity

Answer 9

-spector 1983 - gave LoC scale to 157 uni students, finding those with a high external LoC did conform more than those with a low external LoC, but only in situations involving NSI (both didn’t conform in ISI

Question 10

research on LoC and resisting obedience

Answer 10

-schurz 1985 - found no relationship between LoC and obedience in australian ps, but found ps with internal LoC took more responsibility, suggesting personal control may relate to obedience

Question 11

what are the three other factors involved in resisting conformity?

Answer 11

-reactance
-ironic deviance
-status

Question 12

how does reactance relate to conformity?

Answer 12

-freedom of choice being restricted may cause rebellious anger
-hamilton 2005 - australian adolescents who were told it was normal to experiment with cigarettes so long as they were aware of the risks were less likely to smoke than those who were told never to smoke

Question 13

how does ironic deviance relate to conformity?

Answer 13

-if the truthfulness of the source of ISI is doubted, chances of conforming decrease
-conway + schaller 2005 - office workers used new software if colleague suggested it, but were less likely to use it if they knew their boss told the colleague to suggest it

Question 14

how does status relate to conformity?

Answer 14

-people of a low status are motivated to conform to gain a higher status

Question 15

what are the three other factors involved in the resistance of obedience?

Answer 15

-systematic processing
-morality
-personality

Question 16

how does systematic processing relate to resisting obedience?

Answer 16

-less likely to obey orders with negative outcomes if they’re given time to consider the consequences
-martin et al 2007 - when ps were encouraged to consider the consequences of an unreasonable order, they were less likely to obey

Question 17

how does morality relate to resisting obedience?

Answer 17

-people who decide whether or not to obey based on moral considerations are more resistant to obedience
-milgram 1974 - one p that didn’t obey stated in a post-study interview that he was a vicar and was ‘obeying a higher authority’

Question 18

how does personality relate to resisting obedience?

Answer 18

-some research suggests people who can empathise are more resistant to orders with destructive consequences
-oliner + oliner 1988 - compared 406 ppl that sheltered jews in the war to 126 that didn’t, finding those who did had norms stressed in their upbringing on helping others