outline and evaluate explanations of resistance to social influence Flashcards
locus of control
According to Rotter, locus of control is a personality characteristic that influences whether people conform or obey, or whether they can resist social influence.
It is measured using a questionnaire, which places people on spectrum anywhere between a high internal locus of control and high external locus of control.
Those with an internal locus of control believe they have control over their own behaviour, take responsibility for their actions, are confident in their decision making and do not seek social approval.
Therefore, they are less likely to conform or obey because they can resist social influence.
People with an external locus of control believe their behaviour is controlled by external forces, such as luck or fate, are less confident about their decision making and often seek social approval.
Therefore, they are more likely to conform or obey because they are less able to resist social influence.
social support
Social support also helps people resist conformity as the pressure to conform is reduced if there are other people not conforming.
The presence of this dissenter allows a person freedom to demonstrate independent behaviour, they act as a model.
Social support can also help people resist obedience as the pressure to obey is reduced if there are other people who are also not obeying.
A person may not follow the behaviour of the individual who is not obeying, but their disobedience again frees the participant to show independent behaviour.
strength locus
A strength of locus of control as an explanation for resistance to social influence is that it has research evidence to support it from Holland (1987) who repeated Milgram’s study and measured whether participants had an internal or external locus of control.
He found 37% of internal didn’t continue to the highest shock level whilst only 23% externals didn’t continue.
This shows that those participants with an internal locus of control showed more resistance than those with external locus of control, supporting the validity of locus of control as an explanation for social influence.
limit locus
A limitation of locus of control as an explanation for resistance to social influence is that the role LOC plays in resisting social influence may have been exaggerated.
Rotter (1982) found that LOC is only important in new situations; it has little influence in familiar situations where our previous experiences are always more important.
This means that people who have conformed to or obeyed in specific situations previously are more likely to do so again, even if they have an internal LOC.
Therefore, LOC is only helpful in explaining resistance to social influence in a small range of new situations.
social 1
A strength of social support as an explanation for resistance to conformity is that it has convincing evidence to support it from Asch who found that conformity rates fell to 5.5% from the original 36.8, when another confederate disagreed with the majority group by providing the correct answer.
This is because the social support gave participants confidence in their own attitudes or behaviour, allowing them to resist the social influence they experienced.
social 2
A strength of social support as an explanation for resistance to obedience is that it has convincing research from Milgram who found that obedience rates fell to 10% from the original 65% when he paired the genuine participant with 2 confederates who refused to obey the authority figure.
This is because the social support gave participants confidence in their own attitudes or behaviour, allowing them to resist the social influence they experienced.
