Resistance to social influence 16 marker
Discuss two explanations of resistance to social influence.
Resistance to social influence refers to the ability of people to withstand the social pressures
to conform to the majority or to obey authority and the ability to do this is influenced by both
dispositional and situational factors. The two explanations are locus of control (LOC) and
Social Support.
Locus of Control (LOC) is to what extent a person has a sense of personal control over their
own behavior. LOC is measured on ‘the personality scale’ (Rotter, 1966). Which ranges from
high internal to high external LOC, however generally people aren’t completely
internal/external, most of us are placed on this continuum scale. If a person has an internal
LOC they feel personal control and responsibility for their behaviour and fate, they’re less
concerned with social approval. And are therefore tend to be less conforming and less
obedient, and more likely to resist social influence to conform/obey as they feel more
confident, achievement-oriented, and responsible for their actions. Whereas individuals with
external LOC will more commonly submit to social influence.
Holland's (1967) research supports the link between LOC and resistance to obedience. He
replicated Milgrim's obedience research and measured whether the participants were
internals or externals. He found 37% of intervals didn’t continue to the highest shock level
(e.g. showed some resistance), whereas only 23% of externals didn’t continue. So internals
showed greater resistance to authority, which increases the validity of the LOC explanation
in increasing a person's chances of resisting social influence.
However, there is contradictory research. Twenge et al. (2004) analyzed data from
obedience studies over a 40-year period. The data showed that people have become more
resistant to obedience but also more external. If resistance was linked to an internal LOC,
we would expect people to have become more internal. This challenges the idea that internal
LOC increases resistant behavior. However, it’s possible that the results are due to a
changing society where many things are out of personal control.
Social Support (SS) is being in the presence of people who are deviant and resist the
pressures to obey or conform. These pressures can be reduced if there are other people
present who are not conforming because it builds confidence and allows individuals to
remain independent and avoid normative social influence. Social support can be in the form
of disobedient role models (obedience), as it challenges the legitimacy of an authority figure.
Or having an ally (conformity) which breaks unanimity of the group in conformity situations
because if 1 person becomes a dissenter they act a role model to show that resistance to
social influence is possible, it demonstrates how to resist and the consequences of resisting.
Research support for social support comes from Milgrim. In a variation of his study, a
participant was paired with two confederates who were teachers but refused to obey and
withdrew from the experiment early. Confederate 1 stopped at 150 volts and confederate 2
stopped at 210 volts, reducing the obedience level to 10%. This shows that if the real
participant has support for their desire to disobey, then they are more likely to resist the
pressure of an authority figure.
Discuss two explanations of resistance to social influence.
Resistance to social influence refers to the ability of people to withstand the social pressures
to conform to the majority or to obey authority and the ability to do this is influenced by both
dispositional and situational factors. The two explanations are locus of control (LOC) and
Social Support.
Locus of Control (LOC) is to what extent a person has a sense of personal control over their
own behavior. LOC is measured on ‘the personality scale’ (Rotter, 1966). Which ranges from
high internal to high external LOC, however generally people aren’t completely
internal/external, most of us are placed on this continuum scale. If a person has an internal
LOC they feel personal control and responsibility for their behaviour and fate, they’re less
concerned with social approval. And are therefore tend to be less conforming and less
obedient, and more likely to resist social influence to conform/obey as they feel more
confident, achievement-oriented, and responsible for their actions. Whereas individuals with
external LOC will more commonly submit to social influence.
Holland's (1967) research supports the link between LOC and resistance to obedience. He
replicated Milgrim's obedience research and measured whether the participants were
internals or externals. He found 37% of intervals didn’t continue to the highest shock level
(e.g. showed some resistance), whereas only 23% of externals didn’t continue. So internals
showed greater resistance to authority, which increases the validity of the LOC explanation
in increasing a person's chances of resisting social influence.
However, there is contradictory research. Twenge et al. (2004) analyzed data from
obedience studies over a 40-year period. The data showed that people have become more
resistant to obedience but also more external. If resistance was linked to an internal LOC,
we would expect people to have become more internal. This challenges the idea that internal
LOC increases resistant behavior. However, it’s possible that the results are due to a
changing society where many things are out of personal control.
Social Support (SS) is being in the presence of people who are deviant and resist the
pressures to obey or conform. These pressures can be reduced if there are other people
present who are not conforming because it builds confidence and allows individuals to
remain independent and avoid normative social influence. Social support can be in the form
of disobedient role models (obedience), as it challenges the legitimacy of an authority figure.
Or having an ally (conformity) which breaks unanimity of the group in conformity situations
because if 1 person becomes a dissenter they act a role model to show that resistance to
social influence is possible, it demonstrates how to resist and the consequences of resisting.
Research support for social support comes from Milgrim. In a variation of his study, a
participant was paired with two confederates who were teachers but refused to obey and
withdrew from the experiment early. Confederate 1 stopped at 150 volts and confederate 2
stopped at 210 volts, reducing the obedience level to 10%. This shows that if the real
participant has support for their desire to disobey, then they are more likely to resist the
pressure of an authority figure.
