Resistance to Social Influence Flashcards
(11 cards)
Resistance to social influence
Independent behaviour is the ability to withstand social pressure to conform to the majority or to obey authority.
This is influenced by both situational and dispositional factors.
- 25% did not conform to any trials in Asch’s line study
- 35% did not obey to 450V in Milgram’s original study
- 1/22 nurses did not obey the orders from the doctor in Hofling’s study
ASCH - factors less likely to conform
ASCH - factors less likely to conform
- group size: smaller groups
- unanimity: broken unanimous decision
- task difficulty: easier
MILGRAM - factors less likely to obey
MILGRAM - factors less likely to obey
- location: less prestigious offices
- proximity: teacher and learner in same room
- uniform: everyday clothes
SOCIAL SUPPORT - situational
SOCIAL SUPPORT - situational
- ASCH: if there is a dissenter conformity drops as independent behaviour increases, if model starts to conform then ppt also conforms - short lived conformit dropped to 5%
- MILGRAM: in a variation 2 confederates (also teachers) refused to continue - only 10% continued to 450V
- Model allows ppt to act free from own conscience
LOCUS OF CONTROL - dispositional
LOCUS OF CONTROL - dispositional
- a person’s perception of personal control over their own behaviour and fate
- measure along a continuum - high→low
- Internal LOC: believe they have control over their life and are less concerned with social approval, more independent, easier to resist social influence
- External LOC: blame external forces such as fate or luck
What questionnaire is used to measure LoC?
Rotter’s Locus of Control Scale Questionnaire used to measure LoC
EVALUATION
EVALUATION
Social Support:
- Allen and Levine - Resistance to Conformity
- Gamson et al - Resistance to Obedience
Locus of Control:
- Empirical support - Holland
- Contradictory evidence - Twenge et al
EVAL: Resistance to Conformity
Resistance to Conformity
- Allen and Levine found that presence of dissenter in Asch style study decreased conformity
- dissenter wore glasses and stated they had problems with vision (unreliable)- shows that it was not correct information being provided by the dissenter
- unanimity broken by dissenter so ppt acted freely — this known as invalid social support
- empirical evidence from controlled environment
EVAL: Resistance to Obedience
Resistance to Obedience
- Gamson et al — ppts ordered to give supportive eopinions about unjust decisions of an oil company
- obedience tested by asking ppts to give their consent to use their video responses in an advertising campaign
- 32/33 groups refused to consent
- there were individuals in each group willing to consent
- obedience lower in group situation than individually (Milgrams study) - social support
- empirical evidence from a controlled setting
EVAL: Empirical support
Empirical Support
- Holland replicatede Milgram’s study and found that 37% internals disobeyed at some point, 23% externals disobeyed
- C/A not highly significant difference, 23% externals disobeyed when none should have
EVAL: Contradictory evidence
Contradictory evidence
- Twenge et al found that US population is becoming more external, yet obedience levels have decreased
- suggest LOC =/= RSI empircal challenge
- C/A large scale studies like this struggle to control variables at a wide scale eg; poverty, political change, shifting values, difficult to compatre 2 variables in a controlled way
