Social Influence L11 - Resistance To Social Influence: Locus Of Control

Question 1

Who proposed locus of control

Answer 1

Julian rotter (1966)

Question 2

Locus of control

Answer 2

● This refers to a person’s perception of the degree of personal control they have over their behaviour.
● Those people with a high external locus of control see their future and their actions as resulting largely from factors outside their control such as luck or fate.
● Those people with a high internal locus of control feel a stronger sense of control over their lives than people with an external locus of control. They are also more active seekers of information, rely less on the opinion of other, and are more likely to resist pressure from others. This means they are more likely to show resistance to social influence

Question 3

What does having a high internal LOC mean

Answer 3

• more likely to be able to resist pressures to conform or obey
• if a person takes responsibility for their actions and experiences (good or bad) then they are more likely to base their decisions on their own beliefs and thus resist pressures from other people.
• Another explanation for the link with greater resistance is that people with a high internal LOC tend to be more self-confident, more achievement orientated, have higher intelligence and have less need for social approval.
• These personality traits lead to greater resistance to social influence.

Question 4

Evaluation of locus of control

Answer 4

strengths
Research support
Milgram study repeat
weaknesses
Conflicting research evidence
Temporal validity

Question 5

Research support

Answer 5

• There is supporting evidence for locus of control and resistance to social influence.
• e.g. Oliner and Oliner (1988) interviewed two groups of non-Jewish people who had lived through the Holocaust and Nazi Germany.
• They compared 406 people who had protected and rescued Jews from the Nazis and 126 people who had not done this.
• Oliner and Oliner found that the group that rescued the Jews had scores demonstrating an internal locus of control.
• This study suggests that people who have an internal LOC are likely to act rather than just leave the situation to fate.

Question 6

Milgram study repeat

Answer 6

• Holland (1967) repeated Milgram’s baseline study and measured whether participants were internal or external.
• He found that 37% of internals did not continue to the highest shock (showed resistance). However 23% of externals did not continue.
• Research support of this nature increases the validity of the LOC explanation and our confidence that it can explain resistance to social influence

Question 7

Conflicting research evidence

Answer 7

• One weakness of the locus of control theory in explaining resistance to social influence especially obedience is conflicting research evidence.
• Twenge (2004) analysed data from American obedience studies over a 40 year period (1960 to 2002). - The data showed that, over this time span, people have become more resistance to obedience but also show a more external locus of control.
• If resistance were linked to an internal LOC, we would expect people to have become more internal
• this challenges the link between internal LOC and being resistant to social influence especially obedience.

Question 8

Temporal validity

Answer 8

• This finding that people who are showing resistance to social influence are now showing a more external locus of control also questions how LOC is being measured
• Julian Rotter devised a questionnaire in 1967 where society had very different viewpoints and there had been a World War only 22 years before!
• It also questions whether the Locus of Control questionnaire devised by Rotter in the 1960s is relevant in today’s world.
• Therefore Rotter’s questionnaire that measures a person’s LOC may lack temporal validity and not be relevant in today’s society.