Explanations of resistance to social influence Flashcards
What is resistance to social influence
the ability of people to withstand the pressure to conform to the majority or obey authority
What is an independent role model
someone who doesn’t conform to the group or obey an authority figure
What is social support
The perception that an individual has assistance available from other ppl.
This causes resistance to social influence because independent role models demonstrate that not conforming is an available option
Outline social support as an explanation of resisting conformity
When someone else doesn’t conform this breaks the unanimous position of the majority therefore the pressure to conform is reduced.
Supporters and dissenters are likely to be effective in reducing conformity because they raise the possibility that there are other equally legitimate ways of thinking or responding.
The presence of an ally makes the individual feel more confident in their decision and more able to stand up to the majority
Outline social support as an explanation for resisting obedience
Individuals are generally more confident in their ability to resist the temptation to obey if they can find an ally who is willing to join than apposing the authority figure.
Disobedient peers act as role model for the individual’s own behaviour, the individual challenges the legitimacy of the authority figure making it easier for others to disobey
What are the strengths of Social support as an explanation of resistance
- Supported by Milgram
- Supported for dissenting peers
- Supported by Asch
- Supported by Rees and Wallace
Evaluate support from Milgram as a strength of Social support as an explanation of resistance
P: Supported by Milgram’s research.
E: In one of Milgram’s variations the participant was in a team of three testing the learner, the other two were confederates and refused to shock the learner. Only 10% of ppts carried on to the full 450 volts as opposed to 65% in the original study when the ppt had no social support.
E: This is a strength because Milgram’s study shows that a disobedient role model challenges the legitimacy of an authority figure and makes it easier for others to disobey. This suggests that social support is a valid explanation of resisting obedience.
Evaluate support for dissenting peers as a strength of Social support as an explanation of resistance
P: Supported by research evidence.
E: In a study by Gamson et al (1982), ppts were told to produce evidence that would be used to help an oil company run a smear campaign. The researchers found higher levels of resistance in their study because participants were in groups and could discuss what they were being told to do. 29/33 (88%) groups of participants rebelled against their orders.
E: Strength because it suggests that social support makes it easier to resist social influence (obedience) in the real world. This suggests that social support is a valid explanation of resisting conformity.
Evaluate support from Asch as a strength of Social support as an explanation of resistance
P: Supported by Asch’s research.
E: In one of Asch’s variations he found that when he introduced the presence of an ally who gave the correct answer, providing social support, it caused conformity levels to drop from 36.8% to 5.5%.
E: This is a strength because it shows that the presence of an ally breaks the unanimity of a majority and makes it easier to not conform. Suggests that social support is a valid explanation of resisting conformity.
Evaluate support from Rees and Wallace as a strength of Social support as an explanation of resistance
P: Supported by research.
E: Rees and Wallace (2015) showed that social support provided by friends helped adolescents resist conformity pressures from the majority. People with a majority of friends who drank alcohol were significantly more likely to have engaged in drunkenness and binge drinking over the previous 12 months. They also found that individuals who were able to resist pressures to drink alcohol when they had a friend or two who also resisted.
E: This is a strength because it supports findings from lab based experiments on social influence and shows that the social support offered by non-drinking friends can decrease the odds of a non-drinker deciding to consume alcohol, even when faced with the conformity pressures of a drinking majority. This suggests social support increases an individual’s ability to resist social influence has some validity.
What is locus of control
a persons perception of personal control over their own behaviour
What is a high internal locus of control
Ppl who perceive themselves as having a great deal of personal control over their behaviour and will take responsibility for their own actions
What is a high external locus of control
Ppl who perceive their behaviour as being caused by external influences or luck
What are strengths of locus of control as an explanation of resistance
- Supported by Shute
- Supported by Holland
What are limitations of locus of control as an explanation of resistance
- Over simplistic
- Contradictory research
- Exaggerated
Evaluate research support from Shute as a strategy of locus of control
P: Research that supports the theory that individuals with a high internal locus of control are more likely to demonstrate independent behaviour.
E: Shute (1975) found that people with an internal locus of control were less likely to conform to peer pressure on attitudes to drugs than people with an external locus of control.
E: Strength of the theory as the research demonstrates that people with a high internal locus of control are more likely to resist conformity.
Evaluate research support from Holland as a strength of Locus of control.
P: Supported by research.
E: Holland (1967) repeated Milgram’s baseline study and measured whether participants were internals or externals. He found that 37% of internals did not continue to the highest shock level showing resistance, whereas only 23% of externals did not continue.
E: This demonstrates that people who have an internal locus of control show greater resistance to authority, increasing the validity of the LOC explanation.
Evaluate oversimplicity as a limitation of locus of control
P: The theory that individuals with a high internal locus of control are more likely to show independent behaviour is over-simplistic.
E: Many psychologists believe that Rotter’s measure of locus of control is too general and inflexible as the two attribution styles can be used interchangeably and at different times. For example, people may show an internal LoC when they are in college and study very hard for their exams because they believe they are responsible and in control. However, the same person may show an external LoC when it comes to their romantic relationships and believe the success of such relationships is due to external forces such as luck.
E: Limitation because the theory ignores the complexity of human behaviour and does not take into consideration the influence of situational factors on independent behaviour.
Evaluate contradictory research (Twenge) as a limitation of locus of control
P: That there is evidence that challenges the link between LOC and resistance.
E: Twenge et al (2004) analysed data from American LOC studies conducted over a 40-year period. The data showed that, over this time span, people became more resistant to obedience but also more external. This is a surprising outcome, because if resistance is linked to an internal LOC then the expectation would be for people to have become more internal.
E: Limitation because it suggests that LOC is not a valid explanation of how people resist social influence.
Evaluate exaggeration as limitation of locus of control
P: May have been exaggerated.
E: Rotter (1982) points out that LOC only comes into play in novel situations. It has very little influence over our behaviour in familiar situations where our previous experiences will always be more important.
E: Limitation because it means that people who have conformed or obeyed in specific situations in the past are likely to do so again, even if they have a high internal LOC. This suggests that LoC is not the only explanation for resisting social influence and there may be other explanations that have more influence.
