Resistance to social influence

Question 1

Outline social support for resistance to social influence.

Answer 1

Resisting conformity:
Asch found that the presence of another non-conformist confederate, lowered overall conformity on the ‘lines’ task. Someone else NOT following the majority is social support as they act as a ‘model’ for independent behaviour/dissent.

Resisting obedience:
Milgram found that obedience levels dropped from 65% to 10% when the teacher was joined by another disobedient confederate. The disobedient person acts as a ‘model’ for dissent so they can act on their own conscience.
The disobedient ‘model’ challenges the legitimacy of authority, making it easier for others to also disobey.

Question 2

Give some positive real world examples of resisting social influence .

Answer 2

In 1943, a group of German women protested in Berlin where the Gestapo (Nazi secret police) were holding 2000 Jewish men.
In 1968 Lilian Bilocca in Hull protested against the dangerous working conditions of the trawler men.
In 2020 ‘Black Lives Matter’ protests were organized by people during Covid restrictions.

Question 3

Outline internal and external locus of control.

Answer 3

Internal
Take responsibility for actions
Base decisions
 on own beliefs
Self confident
Highly motivated
Higher intelligence 
Outcomes within your control, determined by decisions and hard work. More likely to resist social influence.
External
X Blame others 
X Depend on opinions of others
X Less confident
X Lack motivation
X Lower intelligence 
Believes outcomes are outside your control. Determined by 'fate' and independent of your hard work or decisions. Less likely to resist social influence.

Question 4

What are the strengths of resistance to social influence?

Answer 4

+ +Allen and Levine (1971) conducted Asch-like task where dissenter was someone with good eyesight. 64% refused to conform however only 3% did without dissenter.
+There is research to support the link between LOC and resistance to obedience. Holland (1967) repeated Milgram’s baseline study and measured whether pps were externals or internals. 37% internals did not continue to highest shock level whereas 23% externals. Shows resistance partly related to LOC.
+There is evidence of the positive effects of social support. Albrecht (2006) et al evaluated an American programme that helps pregnant teens resist social pressures to smoke. Some were provided a slightly older mentor or ‘buddy’. In buddy group were significantly less likely to smoke. Shows social support can help young people resist social influence as part of an intervention in the real world.

Question 5

What are the weaknesses of resistance to social influence?

Answer 5

• Counterpoint to Allen and Levine’s study : study showed that social support does not always help. When dissenter has obviously poor eyesight resistance was only 36%.
• Counterpoint: Evidence challenges link between LOC and resistance. Twenge et al (2004) analyzed LOC studies spanning over 40 yrs. Found that people became more resistant but more external. Suggests LOC is not valid explanation for why people resist social influence.
• Counterpoint: Limited role of LOC. Rotter (1982) argued that LOC only significantly effects behavior in new situations. So findings of this study may be due to this.