Resistance to Social Influence + Minority Influence (SOCIAL INFLUENCE 3/3)

Question 1

resistance to social influence

Answer 1

refers to the ability of an individual to withstand social pressures e.g. conformity and obedience
influenced by both situational and dispositional factors

Question 2

social support

Answer 2

individuals are more likely to resist social influence if they witness others around them also resisting
- gives the observer confidence as it informs them that they are not alone in your view to resist, allowing an individual to act independently

explains that upstanding is important - witnessing someone standing up gives others the confidence to also stand up

Question 3

social support + Asch’s unanimity variation

Answer 3

when confederates gave the correct answer, conformity decreased from 32% to 5%
when confederates gave a different incorrect answer, conformity decreased to 9%

Question 4

social support + Milgram’s variation

Answer 4

participant was paired with two additional confederates, who also played the role of teacher
they refused to continue and withdrew early
percentage of participants who reached 450 volts reduced from 65% to 10%

Question 5

locus of control

Answer 5

refers to how much a person believes that they have control over events that happen in their lives
measured along a scale from internal to external

Question 6

internal locus of control

Answer 6

believe they have a high amount of control over own behaviour and therefore take responsibility of own actions

less likely to go with majority, less concerned with social approval, especially if disagree

Question 7

external locus of control

Answer 7

less likely to resist social influence
believe behaviour is heavily influenced by external factors and so attribute it to situational factors and obey/conform

go with majority, want to fit in and be accepted

Question 8

social support research evidence

Answer 8

Asch’s unanimity variation
Milgram variation (two additional confederates as teachers)

Question 9

locus of control research evidence

Answer 9

Spector
individuals with high internal LOC were less likely to conform but only in cases of normative social influence
no difference for informational social influence
- contradicts ISI
+ supports NSI

Holland
replicated Milgram and measured participants’ LOC
internal - 37% did not reach 450v
external - 23% did not reach 450v
internal less likely to conform
contradicts as percentages still low - must be other explanations

Twenge
analysed data over 40 years
people have become more resistant to influence and more external LOC
lacks temporal validity - changed significantly
invalid, suggests opposite

Question 10

strengths
social support

Answer 10

supporting evidence
Asch / Milgram

Question 11

limitations
social support

Answer 11

lacks mundane realism / task validity
Asch / Milgram - lab setting, unnatural task
impacts validity

ignores dispositional factors
Holland regarding LOC
reductionist, reduces validity

Question 12

strengths
locus of control

Answer 12

supporting evidence
Holland / Spector
Holland contradiction - other explanations

Question 13

limitations
locus of control

Answer 13

contrasting evidence
Twenge

cannot establish cause and effect for LOC’s impact on resistance to social influence
correlational research - only looking at a relationship between two co-variables
do not consider cause and effect, ignores other potential factors, reductionist, reduces validity

Question 14

minority influence

Answer 14

minority group rejects beliefs and behaviours of majority and seek to establish social change

Question 15

social change

Answer 15

when society adopts new behaviour or belief which becomes widely accepted by majority which it was not before
achieved through minority influence

Question 16

Moscovici 3 key processes

Answer 16

consistency
commitment
flexibility

Question 17

consistency

Answer 17

staying true to beliefs and not deviating when faced with social pressure

diachronic - over time
synchronic - between members

Question 18

commitment

Answer 18

risk and sacrifice minority group willing to carry out in order to instigate social change
AUGMENTATION PRINCIPLE - more extreme the risk, more attention paid
symbolises commitment and not acting out of self-interest

Question 19

flexibility

Answer 19

Nemeth
relentless consistency can be counter-productive
perceived as dogmatic, rigid, uncompromised and so majority less likely to listen
should be reasonable, cooperative and willing to accept reasonable counterarguments
adapt / accept compromise to gain receptive support while holding true to beliefs

Question 20

conversion

Answer 20

over time majority viewpoint switches towards minority

tend to forget original views

Question 21

snowball effect

Answer 21

small actions causing bigger and bigger actions resulting in social change

Question 22

social cryptomnesia

Answer 22

origins of social change forgotten by majority

Question 23

minority influence strengths
supporting research evidence
Moscovici (consistency)

Answer 23

female ppts in colour perception task
groups of 6, shown 36 slides of varying shades of blue and had to state the colour
2/6 were confederates
- consistent condition, said all 46 were green
- inconsistent condition, said 24 were green
- control, blue
as consistency increased, minority influence increased

Question 24

minority influence strengths
supporting research evidence
Nemeth (flexibility)

Answer 24

1/4 confederates deciding on amount of compensation given to victim of ski-lift accident
minority argued for low rate and refused to change - had little effect on majority
minority argued for low rate but compromised - majority more likely to change view

Question 25

minority influence weaknesses
Moscovici research evidence lacks ecological validity and mundane realism

Answer 25

lab setting, judging colour of slides
does not reflect how minority influence operates in the real world
setting unnatural, unnatural behaviour unrepresentative

Question 26

minority influence strengths
high applicability

Answer 26

e.g. suffragettes
showed great commitment and sacrifice (Emily Davison and King’s horse) and were consistent over a long time
strengthens ideas proposed as have been practiced by real groups in history and have resulted in conversion and snowball effect

Question 27

minority influence weaknesses
lacks generalisability

Answer 27

Moscovici used all female students
lacks population validity, not representative to all
Jenness found that females considered to be more conformist than males, suggesting a gender difference in response

Question 28

social change values

Answer 28

consistency
commitment
flexibility
snowball effect
social cryptomnesia
internal locus of control
drawing attention
deeper processing

Question 29

internal locus of control (social change)

Answer 29

well-suited to instigating change
believe can make a difference and take responsibility for lack of action

Question 30

drawing attention (social change)

Answer 30

provide proof of problem needing attention

Question 31

deeper processing (social change)

Answer 31

want majority to consider views rather than simply accepting
more likely to change opinions if heard from another majority group since have larger influence

Question 32

social change strengths
supporting research evidence (consistency)

Answer 32

Moscovici found that when confederates were consistent in declaration of wrong answers, ppts accepted minority influence much easier
consistency creates larger impact and more effective

• lacks population validity
  all-female sample, unrepresentative

Question 33

social change strengths
supporting research evidence (snowball effect/social support)

Answer 33

Clarke conducted study on paradigm of 12 Angry Men
when minority able to get one member of majority to defect, rest were more likely to also defect
ceiling effect reached at 3 defectors (cannot increase any more)
expressing desire for social change can result in others also, bigger movement, change more likely

• no. of defector does not increase past 3
  individual differences and personal opinions

Question 34

social change weaknesses
fails to account for different groups

Answer 34

Bashir found that people resist social change even when believe necessary because they want to avoid being associated with negative stereotypes of minority group
reputation influential to success
can be barrier

Question 35

social change weaknesses
fails to account for role of majority

Answer 35

Maass found that heterosexual individuals are more successful at convincing members of majority to support gay rights that when homosexuals campaigned
identification with minority means majority are more likely to support social change
relatability important and diversity can affect reception and reach of influence