Explanations of resistance to social influence - Social support and Locus of control

two types of resistance to social influence

situational factors - social support
dispositional factors - locus of control

social support

involves resisting conformity and resisting obedience

resisting conformity

conformity is less likely when a dissenter breaks the majority. (the dissenter acts as a 'role model' of independent behaviour)

resisting obedience

obedience is less likely when a dissenter challenges the legitimacy of authority. the agentic state is less likely since the role model acts as a dissenter, freeing the participant from their own conscience

rotter's theory of locus of control

refers to the idea that we have or don't have control of what directs the events in our lives (internal or external factors)

internal LOCs

people who believe that events in their lives are controlled largely by them

external LOCs

people who believe that the events in their lives are outside their control

the LOC continuim

people are neither external or internal, it is a scale. people's positions on it often vary.

resistance to social influence - LOC

people with a high internal LOC are more likely to resist pressures to conform or obey as they take responsibility for their actions and experiences, basing their decisions on their own beliefs.
OR they have characteristics of leaders, needing less social approval than others - more confident, achievement-oriented and have a higher intelligence.

support for social support - albright et al

real-world research. researchers evaluated an 8 week programme helping pregnant women aged 14-19 resist peer pressure to smoke. social support was provided by an older role model. found that those who had a role model were less likely to smoke than those who didn't

support for social support - gamson et al

told participants to produce evidence that would help a company run a smear campaign (damage a reputation). 88% rebelled against orders likely due to being in groups. peer support led to undermining of legitimacy of authority

contradicting research for social support - allen and levine

asch type task. when dissenter had 'good eyesight' resistance reached to 64%, when they had poor eyesight it was only 36%. without a dissenter resistance to conformity was only 3%

support for locus of control - holland et al

repeated milgram's baseline study and measured whether participants were internals or externals. 37% of internals didn't continue to the highest voltage whole 23% of externals didn't continue. therefore internals showed greater resistance to authority

contradicting research for locus of control - twenge et al

conducted a meta-analysis from LOC studies in the US over a 40 year period (1960-2002). over time people became more resistant to obedience but also the number of externals increased. we would've expected the opposite according to LOC theory, therefore the validity of LOC is questioned/undermined

limitation of LOC - role may be exaggerated

rotter points out that it's only a determining factor in certain situations (new situations). if you have conformed/obeyed in a specific situation in the past, you're likely to do so again