resistance to social influence

Question 1

how many people did not conform in Asch’s study?

Answer 1

24%

Question 2

how many people didn’t conform in Milgram’s study?

Answer 2

35% - 14 pps did not obey (didn’t go up to 450 V)

Question 3

how many people resisted conformity in Zimbardo’s study?

Answer 3

around 2/3 of the guards resisted the pressure to behave sadistically towards the prisoners

Question 4

what factors lead people to resist social pressure?

Answer 4

SOCIAL SUPPORT - external factor
LOCUS OF CONTROL - internal factor

Question 5

social support

Answer 5

someone else present who is NOT CONFORMING
- ally - someone SUPPORTING the individual’s point of view
- can build confidence
- allow individual’s to remain independent
OR, just someone giving a diff. answer to the majority

Question 6

social support in asch’s study

Answer 6

conformity dropped to 5.5% - one CORRECT dissenter in the group
- incorrect dissenter = 9% conformity

Question 7

research evidence for social support - Allen and Levine (1971)

Answer 7

conformity DECREASED when there was one DISSENTER
- in an Asch-type study
- even though person said they had vision problems
- shows that having one person in a group whose view goes against the majority can lead an individual to resist conforming
- social support = powerful

Question 8

social support in Milgram’s study

Answer 8

pressure to obey can be REDUCED if there’s another person who is seen to DISOBEY
- obedience rates dropped from 65% to 10% when the real participant was joined by a DISOBEDIENT CONFEDERATE
- (person may not follow confed’s behaviour, BUT has a will to follow / not based on their conscience)

Question 9

social support research support - disobedient peer - Gamson et al. (1982) method

Answer 9

situation in which pps were encouraged to REBEL against unjust authority
- advert asking volunteers to take part in a GROUP DISCUSSION on ‘standards of behaviour in the community’
- groups of 9
- 33 groups
- met by a consultant from MHRC (fake company)
- pps asked to talk about the SACKING of a petrol station manager (MHRC taking LEGAL ACTION against him)
- cameraman STOPPED FILMING, instructed them to AGREE w MHRC (decision to sack the manager)
- pps asked to sign a consent from allowing the film to be shown in a court case

Question 10

Gamson et al (1982) findings (social support - obedience)

Answer 10

of the 33 groups tested, 32 REBELLED in some way
- pps established a STRONG GROUP IDENTITY
- members agreed the demands of authority = unreasonable
- they said they ‘don’t want to go on record’ … ‘all 3 of us feel the same way’
- in 25 / 33 groups, the majority of group members REFUSED to sign the consent form
- 9 groups even threatened legal action against MHRC
- shows the POWER OF SOCIAL SUPPORT when resisting obedience to authority

Question 11

strength of social support

Answer 11

RESEARCH SUPPORT
- Asch, Milgram, Gamson

Question 12

strength of social support studies

Answer 12

can be applied to REAL LIFE
- Gamson’s study = high ECOLOGICAL VALIDITY
- pps were unaware they were in a psychological study
- no demand characteristics
- task given to pps was real to life

Question 13

weakness of social support

Answer 13

explanation is STRONG when you have a group size of UNDER 10 ppl
- dissenter can influence non conformity / disobedience
BUT
- irl, group sizes are BIGGER (eg 100s)
- having 1 dissenter in a big group will NOT have any influence on majority
- so, studies explaining social support = LIMITED to small group sizes
- more research is required to establish effects of social support on resistance to social influence

Question 14

locus of control

Answer 14

Rotter (1966)
- refers to a person’s perception of the DEGREE of PERSONAL CONTROL they have over their behaviour

Question 15

high EXTERNAL locus of control

Answer 15

ppl see their future and actions as resulting largely from factors OUTSIDE THEIR CONTROL
- eg luck or fate

Question 16

high INTERNAL locus of control

Answer 16

feel a stronger sense of CONTROL over their lives
- more active seekers of info, rely less on opinions of others, more likely to resist pressure from others
- more likely to show RESISTANCE to SOCIAL INFLUENCE

Question 17

why is there a link between resistance to social pressure and ppl w internal LOC

Answer 17

they tend to be more SELF CONFIDENT - more achievement oriented, have higher intelligence, LESS NEED fro social APPROVAL

Question 18

why is there a link between resistance to social pressure and ppl w internal LOC

Answer 18

they tend to be more SELF CONFIDENT - more achievement oriented, have higher intelligence, LESS NEED fro social APPROVAL

Question 19

example : ‘i have failed my exam’ - how would each LOC react?

Answer 19

INTERNAL - ‘i should have studied more, i didn’t put enough effort in’
EXTERNAL - ‘i have a rubbish teacher, the exam was on a bad day’

Question 20

what is used to measure internal vs external LOC

Answer 20

Rotter’s LOC scale
- determines whether you have internal or external
- low score - 8 or less = INTERNAL
- high score - 9 or more = EXTERNAL

Question 21

strength of LOC

Answer 21

supporting evidence
- Oliner and Oliner (1988)
- Holland (1967)

Question 22

Oliner and Oliner (1988) - LOC research

Answer 22

• interviewed 2 groups of non-jewish people, lived through the holocaust
• compared 406 people who had PROTECTED & rescued Jews and 126 people who had NOT
• the group who helped the jews had scores demonstrating an INTERNAL LOC
• study suggests that ppl w internal loc are more likely to ACT rather than leave the situation to fate

Question 23

Holland (1967) - LOC research

Answer 23

repeated Milgram’s baseline study
- measured whether ppl were internal or external
- found that 37% of internals did NOT continue to highest shock (showed resistance)
- BUT, 23% of externals did not continue
- research support of this nature increases VALIDITY of the LOC explanation
- higher confidence that it can EXPLAIN resistance to social influence

Question 24

weakness of LOC explanation

Answer 24

CONFLICTING RESEARCH EVIDENCE (especially obedience)
- Twenge (2004) analysed data from american obedience studies over 40 years (1960-2002)
- data showed that people have become MORE RESISTANT to obedience
- but also show a more EXTERNAL LOC
- challenges link between internal LOC and being resistant to social influence - especially obedience

Question 25

weakness of LOC explanation (Rotter)

Answer 25

QUESTIONS HOW LOC IS BEING MEASURED
- Rotter devised questionnaire in 1967 - diff. societal viewpoints
- questions whether questionnaire is RELEVANT in today’s world
- so, questionnaire may lack TEMPORAL VALIDITY and may not be RELEVANT n today’s world