Resistance to Social Influence

Question 1

What is a locus of control?

Answer 1

A person’s perception of personal control over their own behaviour

Question 2

What is a strong internal locus of control?

Answer 2

• Associated with the belief that we control events in out life
• Believing that what happens to them is a consequence of their own ability and efforts
• More likely to display independence in thought and behaviour
• Rely less on the opinions of others, more likely to resist social influence

Question 3

What is strong external locus of control?

Answer 3

• Believing that what happens to them is determined by external factors, e.g. other or luck.
• A sense that things ‘just happen to them’ ad are out of their control
• Tend to approach event with a more passive and fatalistic attitude, taking less personal responsibility
• Less likely to display independent haviour and more likely to accept influence

Question 4

Describe how a high internal locus of control resists social influence

Answer 4

• They actively seek info that is useful to them so don’t rely on the opinions, making them less vulnerable to them.
• Tend to be more achievement-oriented so more likely to be leaders rather than following others. Spector (1982) found that a relationships exists between locus of control and leadership style, with internals being more persuasive and goal-oriented than externals
• Able to resist coercion from others. e.g. in a simulated prisoner-of-war camp, internals better resisted the attempts of an interrogator to gain info. Hutchins and Estey (1978) found that the more intense the pressure, the greater the difference between internals performance and the externals

Question 5

Give evaluation for locus of control (historical trend)

Answer 5

• There’s a historical trend in locus of control, with young people becoming increasingly external
• A meta-analysis by Twenge et al (2004) found that young Americans increasingly believed that their fate was determined more by luck and others rather than their own actions. Researchers found that locus of control scores became more external in student and child samples between 1960 and 2002
• Twenge interprets this trend in terms of the alienation experienced by young people and the tendency to explain misfortunes on outside forces.

Question 6

Give evaluation for locus of control (normative social influence)

Answer 6

• Locus of control is related more to normative social influence
• Spector (1983) measured locus of control and predisposition to normative and informational social influence in 157 undergraduate students
• He found a correlation between locus of control and predisposition to normative social influence, with externals more likely to conform to this influence. However, he found no relationship for predisposition to informational social influence, with locus of control not appearing to be a significant factor in this type of conformity
• Spector concluded that externals would conform more in situation of normative pressure nut wouldn’t conform in situations of informational pressure

Question 7

Give evaluation for locus of control (supporting research)

Answer 7

• Holland repeated Milgram’s study and measured whether participants were internals.
• He found 37% of internals didn’t give the highest shock while 23% of externals didn’t give the highest shock
• Internals are more able to resist authority

Question 8

What is social support?

Answer 8

The presence of people who resist the pressures of social influence, can help others to do the same. These people act as models to show others that resistance to social influence is possible

Question 9

How did Asch research the effect of social support on conformity?

Answer 9

In Asch’s unanimity variation, he introduced a confederate who disagreed (dissenter) with others, sometimes giving the right and wrong answer. Conformity was reduced by a quarter compared with there a unanimous majority

Question 10

How did Milgram research the effect of social support on obedience?

Answer 10

• In one of his variations, the participant was was in a team of 3 testing the learner. The other 2 were confederates who refused to continue shocking the learner.
• Their defiance had a influence on the participants, with obedience levels dropping from 65% to 10% at the maximum shock level

Question 11

Why does the presence of social support cause conformity and obedience to decrease?

Answer 11

• Supports and dissents can reduce conformity as, by breaking the unanimity of the majority, they raise the possibility of other legitimate ways of thinking and responding. An ally provides the individual with an independent assessment of reality and makes them more confident in their decisions and better able to stand up to the majority.
• Individuals are more confident in their ability to resist temptation to obey if they have an ally who is willing to join them. Disobedient peers act as role models on which the individual can model their own behaviour.

Question 12

Give evaluation for social support (real world help)

Answer 12

• There is real world research support
• Albrecht (2006) evaluated a 8-week programme to help pregnant teens (14-19) to stop smoking. The teens were paired with a buddy provided social support. When the programme finished, teens with buddies were less likely to smoke than a control group who didn’t have a buddy.
• Social support can help young help resist social influence as part of real-world intervention

Question 13

Give evaluation for social support (research support)

Answer 13

• Research evidence supports the role of dissenting peers in resisting conformity
• For example, Allen and Levine (1971) found that conformity decreased when there was 1 dissenter in an Asch-type study. More importantly, this occurred even if the dissenter wore thick glasses and said he had trouble with his vision.
• Supports that resistance isn’t just motivated by following what someone else says but it enables someone to be free of the pressure from the group

Question 14

Give evaluation for social support (social support in the real world)

Answer 14

• The Rosentrasse protest is a illustration of Milgram’s research in real life
• In 1943, a group of German women protested in the Rosenstrasse in Berlin, where the Gestapo were holding 2,000 Jewish men, most who were married to non-Jews or were the child of ‘mixed’ marriage. Despite the Gestapo threatening to open fire, the women’s courage prevailed and the Jews were set free.
• Milgram found that the presence of disobedient peers gave the participants courage and confidence to resist the authority’s others. Likewise, these women defied the authority of the Gestapo together, given courage by the collective action of their peers