Resisting social influence Flashcards
AO1: resistance to social support meanings and two studies
ability of people to withstand social pressure to conform to the majority or obey authority
conformity study - Asch found that conformity reduced to 5.5% when one of the confederates gave a different answer to the rest of the group
obedience study- Milgram found obedience dropped from 65% to 10% when the genuine/naive participant was joined by a disobedient confederate
AO3: strength- research support for resistance to obedience
P: research support
E:participants were told to produce evidence to help an oil company run a ‘smear campaign’
E: They found higher levels of resistance in their study than Milgram did. This was probably because they were in groups so could discuss what to do. 88% of groups rebelled against orders
L: This shows that peer support can lead to disobedience by undermining the legitimacy of an authority figure.
AO3: strength- research support for resistance to conformity
P: research support
E: Asch type line experiment. When the dissenter was someone with apparently good eyesight 64% of participants refused to conform. When there was no supporter, only 3% resisted. when the dissenter had obviously poor eyesight (he wore thick glasses), resistance was only 36%.
L: this shows that social support is a valid explanation of resistance. Levels of resistance are high when the support is reliable. But resistance drops when people believe that the support offered by a dissenter is not helpful because it cannot be relied upon.
AO1: locus of control (Rotter)
internal LOC: believes things that happen are controlled by themselves
external LOC: believes things that happen to them are outside their control
LOC continuum: it is a scale and individuals vary on it
AO3: strength- LOC research support
P: supports link between locus of control and whether individuals will be more or less obedient.
E/E: repeated Milgram’s study and measured whether pps were internals or externals. 37% of internals did not continue to the highest shock level. Only 23% of externals did not continue
L: As internals showed greater resistance this support increases the validity of the LOC explanation and our confidence that it can explain resistance
AO3: limitation- LOC contradictory research
P: contradictory research in theory of LOC in explaining resistance to obedience
E: analysed data from American obedience studies over a 40-year period (1960-2002). The data showed that, over this time span, people have become more resistant to obedience, but more external
E: If resistance were linked to an internal LOC then we would expect people to have become more internal
L: challenges the link between internal LOC and resistance
HOWEVER,
the results may be due to a changing society where many things are increasingly outside personal control
