Lesson 10: Explanations of Resistance to Social Influence

Question 1

Stats of participants in Asch, Zimbardo, Hofling and Milgrams who resisted social influence

Answer 1

Asch - 25% of pps did not conform at any point in the study
Milgram- (35%) of the 40 male pps did not obey the authority figure and did not go up to 450V
Hoflings experiment- one nurse disobeyed and did not administer the drug
Zimbardos- around two thirds of the guards resisted the pressure to behave sadistically towards the prisoners

Question 2

What are obedience and disobedience influenced by?

Answer 2

(situational factors)- presence of others providing social support
(dispositional e.g. personality) factors- internal/external locus of control

Question 3

Social support and how it impacts obedience

What does Asch say about the dissenter?

Answer 3

People can resist pressures to conform if they have an ally supporting their point of view.
- allows them to build confidence and remain independent
- no longer fear being ridiculed, allowing them to avoid normative social influence (NSI)

Asch reports that if the dissenter then returns to conform then so does the naïve participant, indicating short term effects.

Question 4

Example of when conformity dropped when there was a dissenter (Asch)

Answer 4

In Aschs variations, conformity rates dropped to 5.5% when there was one correct dissenter in the group. Furthermore, if the dissenter was incorrect them conformity still dropped but to 9%.

Question 5

Research for resisting conformity- Allen and Levine (1971) findings

Answer 5

Found that conformity decreased when there was one dissenter in an Asch type study- even if this person said that they had problems with their vision and was wearing thick glasses.

This shows how having just one person in a group whose view goes against the majority can lead an individual to resist conforming, proving the power of social support.

Question 6

How does social support affect obedience?

Answer 6

The pressure to obey can be reduced if there is another person who is seen to obey.
- in one of Milgrams variations, obedience rates dropped from 65% to 10% when the real participant was joined by a disobedient confederate
- the person may not always follow the disobedients persons behaviour but will have an urge to based on their conscience

Question 7

Gamson et al (1982) aim

Answer 7

• they wanted to set up a situation in which pps were encouraged to rebel against unjust authority

Question 8

Gamson et al procedure

Answer 8

• researchers placed an advert in local newspapers in a town in Michigan, USA asking for volunteers to take part in a paid group discussion on ‘standards of behaviour in the community’
• those who responded asked to attend a group discussion at local holiday inn
• put into groups of 9
• met by a consultant from a fictional human relations company called MHRC
• the consultant explained that MHRC was conducting research for an oil company, which was taking legal action against the petrol station manager
• they argued the manager had been sacked because his lifestyle was offensive to the local community
• however, manager argued that he had been sacked for speaking out on local TV against high petrol prices
• pps asked to take part in a filmed group discussion and as the discussion unfolded, it became apparent that the pps’ own views were irrelevant and that MHRC wanted them to argue in favour of sacking
• multiple times, the cameraman stopped filming and instructed members of group to argue in favour of oil company’s decision to sack the manager
• finally, pps asked to sign a consent form allowing the film to be shown in a court case

Question 9

What did rebellion against authority in Gamson experiment involve?

Answer 9

Challenging two well established norms- the norm of obedience and the norm of commitment, both of which pps had engaged in by agreeing to take part in the study

Question 10

Gamson experiment findings

Answer 10

• 32/33 groups rebelled in some way during the group discussion
• pps established a strong group identity in which the member agreed that the demands of the authority were unreasonable
• can be seen from how they addressed the MHRC coordinator- ‘we dont want to go on record’
• in 25/33 groups, the majority of group member refused to sign the consent form allowing the film to be used in court
• 9 groups even threatened to take legal action against MHRC

Question 11

Strengths of social support

Answer 11

Research support
- Asch 5.5%
- milgrams study when the real participant was joined by a disobedient confederate who refused to give shocks- obedience rates dropped to 10%

Social support studies can be applied to real life so high ecological validity
- Gamson study had high ecological validity as pps weren’t aware they were participating in a psychological study so didn’t show demands characteristics

Question 12

Weaknesses of social support

Answer 12

May only be a strong explanation for small groups of less than 10 people
- in the real world, group sizes much larger so having one dissenter may not make an impact
- thus studies explaining social support are restricted to small group sizes

Most studies for social support are lab studies and therefore lack ecological validity