Resistance to social influence Flashcards
Resisting conformity
Resistance to social influence: Social Support
Pressure to conform can resisted if there are other people present who aren’t conforming
SImply fact that someone else is not following majority is social support
Enables naive ppt to be free to follow their own conscience
The confed acts as ‘model’ of independent behaviour
Their dissent gives rise to more dissent because it shows majority is no longer unanimous
Resisting obedience
Resistance to social influence: Social Support
Pressure to obey can be resisted if there is another person seen to disobey
In one of Milgram’s variations, rate of obedience dropped from 65% to 10% when genuine ppt was joined by disobedient confed
Ppt may not follow disobedient person’s behaviour but point is other person’s disobedience acts as ‘model’ of dissent for ppt to copy & frees him to act from his own conscience
Disobedient model challenges legitimacy of authority figure, making it easier for others to disobey
Evaluation: Real-world research support
Resistance to social influence: Social Support
Strength: research evidence for + effects of social support
Albrecht et al evaluated Teen Fresh Start USA, an 8-week programme to help pregnant adolescents aged 14-19 resist peer pressure to smoke
Social support was provided by slightly older mentor
At end of programme adolescents who had mentor were sigly less likely to smoke than CG who did not have mentor
Therefore, social support can help young people resist social influence as part of intervention in real world
Evaluation: Research support for dissenting peers
Resistance to social influence: Social Support
Strength: research evidence to support role of dissenting peers in resisting obedience
Gamson et al’s ppts were told to produce evidence that would be used to help an oil company run a smear campaign
Researchers found higher levels of resistance in their study than Milgram did in his because ppts were in groups so could discuss what they were told to do
29/33 groups of ppts rebelled against their orders
Therefore, peer support can lead to disobedience by undermining LOA
Locus of control (LOC)
Resistance to social influence: Locus of control
Rotter proposed LOC as concept concerned w/ internal control vs external control
Some people have internal LOC - believe things that happen to them are controlled by themselves
Some people have external LOC - believe things that happen are outside of their control
LOC continuum
Resistance to social influence: Locus of control
People are not just either internal or external
LOC is a scale & individuals vary in their position on it
HIgh internal LOC is at one end & high external LOC at the other
Low internal & Low external lie in-between
Resistance to social influence
Resistance to social influence: Locus of control
People w/ high internal LOC are more able to resist pressure to conform or obey
If person takes personal responsibility for their actions, they tend to base their decisions on their own beliefs rather than depending on opinions of others
Another explanation - people w/ high internal LOC are more self-confident, more achievement-oriented & have higher intelligence
These traits lead to greater resistance to social influence
These are also characteristics of leaders, who have much less need for social approval than followers
Evaluation: Research support
Resistance to social influence: Locus of control
Strength: evidence supports link between LOC & resistance to obedience
Holland repeated Milgram’s baseline & measured whether ppts were internals or externals
He found that 37% of internals didn’t continue to highest shock level, whereas only 23% of externals didn’t continue
Internals showed greater resistance to authority
Therefore, resistance is partly related to LOC, which increases validity of LOC as explanation of disobedience
Evaluation: Contradictory research
Resistance to social influence: Locus of control
Limit: evidence challenges link between LOC & resistance
E.g. Twenge et al analysed data from American LOC studies conducted over 40 year period
Data showed over this time span, people became more resistant to obedience but also more external
This is suprising outcome
If resistance is linked to internal LOC, we would expect people to have become more internal
Therefore, LOC is not a valid explanation of how people resist social influence
