social influence - resistance to social influence Flashcards
how does social support help to resist conformity
a dissenter provides social support to enable the individual to follow their own conscience as they are able to avoid normative social influence
the dissenter acts as a model of independent behaviour
seen in Asch’s study with the use of a dissenter to break unanimity - conformity decreased
how does social support help to resist conformity
if a person disobeys, they provide social support and act as a model of dissent, freeing an individual to also act from their own conscience
disobedient mode challenges the legitimacy of the authority
Milgram’s variations - obedience dropped to 10% when a participant was joined by a disobedient confederate
strength of social support - research support
for conformity:
- Albrecht et al (2006) evaluated Teen Fresh Start USA - adolescents with a buddy were significantly less likely to smoke than control group without buddy
for obedience:
- Gamson et al (1982) asked participants to produce evidence used for an oil company smear campaign. 88% were disobedient, likely to be because they were in groups, which provided social support for disobedience
who suggested Locus of Control
Rotter (1966)
what is external locus of control?
a person believes the things that happen are outside of their control
what is internal locus of control?
a person believes the things that happen to them are controlled by themselves
what is the LOC continuum?
people aren’t simply internal or external, but lie somewhere on the continuum
how does LOC link to resistance to social influence?
people with high internal LOC are more likely to resist social influence
they take responsibility for their actions so base decisions on their own beliefs rather than depending on the opinions of others
more self-confident, achievement-oriented, and have higher intelligence.
- these traits lead to greater resistance to social influence
- characteristics of leaders, who have less need for social approval
strength of LOC - research support
Holland (1967) repeated Milgram’s baseline study and measured whether participants were internals or externals
37% of internals didn’t fully obey
23% of externals didn’t fully obey
- internals showed greater resistance
limitation of LOC - contradictory evidence
Twenge et al (2004) analysed data from American LOC studies from over a 40 year period
found people became more resistant to obedience but also more external