Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Resistance to Social influence - Coggle Diagram
Resistance to Social influence
Non-Conformity can occur in two ways
Independence : Involving a lack of consistent movement either towards or away from social expectancy ( doing your own thing )
Anti-Conformity : Involving a consistent movement away from social conformity , for instance adopting the behaviour and norms of a minority group
Research for Social support - Conformity
Allen and Levine (1971) found that conformity was reduced on a task involving visual judgements if there was a dissenter , even if the dissenter wore glasses with thick lenses and admitted to having a sight problem . Shows that dissenters help to resist social influence even when they are not skilled in particular situations
Asch (1956) found that if there is a dissenter who answers correctly from the start of the study , conformity drops from 32% to 5.5% . But if the confederate only starts to dissent later in the study , conformity only drops to 8.5% . This suggests that social support received earlier is more effective than support received later
Social Support - Obedience
Presence of disobedient models has been shown to be a powerful source of social support
Disobedient models reduce the unanimity of the group , making it easier for individuals to act independently and demonstrate that it is possible to disobey and how to do it
Disobedient models create a group norm for individuals to follow
Research for Social support - Obedience
Milgram (1974) found that when two confederates paired with a real participant left the study early on , only 10% of participants gave the maximum 450 volt shock . This suggests that the creating of a group norm of disobedience put the participants under pressure to conform to the behaviour of the confederates
Mullen (1990) found that when the disobedient models broke the law by jay walking , participants were more likely to jay walk themselves than when disobedient models weren't present . This supports the idea that disobedient models increase resistance to social influence
Locus of control
Locus of control was identified as a personality diemnsion by Rotter (1966)
It concerns the extent to which people perceive themsleves as being in control of their lives
Individuals with an internal LOC believe they can affect the outcomes of situations
Individuals with an external LOC believe things turn out a certain way regardless of their actions
Internal LOC refers to the belief that things happen as a result of an individuals choices and decisions , while external LOC refers to the belief that things happen as a result of luck , fate or other uncontrollable external forces
Rotter believed that having an internal LOC makes individuals more resistant to social pressure , with those seeing themselves in control of the situation are more likely to perceive themselves as having a free choice to conform or obey
Research for Locus of control - Conformity
Spector (1983) gave LOC scale to 157 university students and found that participants with a high external locus of control conformed more than those with a low external focus of control , but only in situations that produced normative social pressure and both types of participants did not conform in situations that produced informational social pressure . This suggests that people with less of a need for acceptance into a social group will be more able to resist social influence
Shute (1975) exposed undergraduates to peers who expressed either conservative or liberal attitudes to drug taking .He found that undergraduates with an internal LOC conformed less to expressing pro-drug attitudes , supporting the idea that having an internal LOC increases resistance to conformity
Moghaddem (1998) found that japanese people conform more easily than americans and have more of an external LOC . This suggests that differences in resistance to social influence across cultures can be explained by differences in LOC
Avtigis (1998) performed a meta-analysis of studies involving LOC and conformity , finding that individuals with an internal locus of control were less easily persuadable and less likely to conform . This supports the idea of differences in LOC being linked to differences in the ability to resist social influence
Research for locus of control - Obedience
Holland (1967) tested for a link between LOC and obedience but found no relationship between the two . However Blass 91991) reanalysed Hollands data using more precise statistical analysis and found that participants with an internal LOC were more able to resist obedience than those with an external LOC . Those with an internal LOC were especially resistant if they thought the researcher was trying to force or manipulate them to obey . This suggests the aspect of personal control in a situation is important , as those with a high internal LOC like to feel they have a choice over their behaviour
Schurz (1985) found no relationship between LOC and obedience among austrian participants who gave the highest level of what they believed to be painful , skin damaging bursts of ultrasound to a learner . However participants with an internal LOC tended to take more responsibility for their actions thank those with an external LOC .Suggests that feelings of personal control may be related to resistance of social influence
Jones and Kavanah (1996) investigated the link between moral disengagement and individual differences in LOC . They found that those with a high external LOC were more likely to obey unethical authority figures . This is a possible explanation for corporate fraud and institutional abuses of power where junior staff members fail to resist immoral/criminal directives given to them by more senior managers
Social support - Conformity
When there are others in social situations who defy attempts to make them conform and obey , it makes it much easier for an individual to resist social influence
With conformity , the presence of others who dissent has proven to be a strong source of defiance
The dissenter represents a form of social support
If the agreement of the majority is broken , they have less influence
Early social support is more influential ; if an individual finds themselves in a situation in which pressures towards conformity are increasing and they feel they should be resisted , they should try and speak out as soon as possible . The sooner they do , the greater chances of rallying others and resisting the majority
