Explanations Of Resistance To Social Influence

Question 1

Outline Social Support

Answer 1

One explanation of resistance to social influence is social support. This is where people can resist pressures to conform or obey when they receive social support. This is because having an ally gives us confidence and support, making it possible to resist the pressures to conform or obey and remain independent in our behaviour. Individuals who have support for their point of view no longer fear being ridiculed, allowing them to avoid normative social influence.

Question 2

Evaluate Social Support as an explanation for resistance to social influence (2 x AO3)

Answer 2

1. Research to support resistance to conformity comes from Asch. In Asch’s original conformity study the confederates all gave the same wrong answer and conformity was 37%. However, when Asch varied his study and had one confederate give the correct answers throughout the research, conformity dropped to 5.5%. Therefore, this supports social support as an explanation for resistance to conformity because it suggests as the confederate provided the real participant with social support, it gave them confidence to remain independent and resist the pressure to conform.
2. Research to support resisting the pressure to obey comes from Milgram. In one of the variations of Milgram’s study, the real participant was paired with two additional confederates. The two additional confederates refused to go on and withdrew from the experiment early. In this variation, the participants who proceeded to the full 450V had decreased. Therefore, this supports social support as an explanation for resistance to obedience because it shows that if the real participant has support they are more likely to resist obedience to the authority figure.

Question 3

Outline Locus of Control

Answer 3

One explanation of resistance to social influence is Locus of Control (LOC) which is a personality trait that refers to a person’s perception of personal control over their behaviour. There is a scale of LOC with internal at one end and external at the other. Individuals with an internal LOC believe that they control what happens to them and that their behaviour is caused by their own personal decisions and effort. They are more likely to remain independent in their behaviour which means that they are better able to resist social influence. Alternatively, individuals with an external LOC believe that what happens to them is determined by external factors such as luck or fate. They take less personal responsibilty for their actons and are less likely to remain independent so are less able to resist social influence.

Question 4

Evaluate Locus of Control (2 x AO3)

Answer 4

1. Research to support Locus of Control was conducted by Milgram & Elms. They interviewed Milgram’s original participants and found that those who had an internal locus of control were significantly more likely to refuse to continue giving shocks, whereas those with an external locus of control were more likely to be within the 65% that gave the full 450v. Therefore, supporting the existence of locus of control as an explanation for resistance to social influence because those with an internal locus of control were more likely to resist obedience and remain independent in their
   behaviour.
2. Research to support the existence of locus of control was carried out by Spector, who measured locus of control and predisposition to NSI and ISI in students. Spector found that students with an external locus of control were more likely to conform to NSI than those with an internal locus of control. However, there was no difference Between the two groups for situations of ISI. This supports the idea that individuals with an internal LOC are more likely to resist social influence in certain situations because they are less concerned with being liked and are more likely to remain independent.