There is research evidence to support the role of dissenting peers.
Allen and Levine 1971 found that conformity decreased when there was a dissenter
in Asch type study.
This happened even when the dissenter wore thick classes and said he had difficulty
with vision.
Resistance is not just motivation by following what someone else says but allows
someone to be free from pressure of group
Research evidence to support the role of dissenting peers in resisting obedience.
Gmason et al, 1982 higher levels of resistance in their study than Milgram.
Ppt were in groups to provide evidence to help an oil company run a smear
campaign. 29 out of 33 groups rebelled.
Shows peer support is linked to greater resistance.
Research evidence to support link between LOC and resistance to obedience
Evidence: Holland 1967, repeated Milgram’s study and measured whether ppts had
internal or external LOC. 37% of ILOC didn’t continue to highest shock level. Only
23% of ELOC didn’t go to highest level.
Explanation: Internal people show greater resistance to authority
Link: increases validity of LOC explanation and our confidence that it can explain
resistance.
Not all research supports link between LOC and resistance
Twenge etal analysed American LOC studies over 40 years period. People became
more resistant but also more external.
If resistance were linked to internal LOC, we would expect ppl to become more
internal
Challenges the link between internal LOC and increasing resistance.
The role of LOC in resistance may have been exaggerated
Rotter says LOC only matters in novel situations
It has little influence over our behaviour in familiar situations where our previous
experiences will always be more important. People who obey in specific situations in
the past are more likely to do so again, even if they have a high internal LOC.
Often overlooked in discussions of LOC and resistance
LOC relates to normative influence but not informational
Spector 1983 measured LOC and predisposition to normative and informational
social influence.
Found significant correlation between LOC (external) and predisposition to
normative social influence. But no correlation to informational social influence.
LOC is a limited explanation, not significant factor for this type of conformity.
Allen and Levine 1971 found that conformity decreased when there was a dissenter
in Asch type study.
This happened even when the dissenter wore thick classes and said he had difficulty
with vision.
Resistance is not just motivation by following what someone else says but allows
someone to be free from pressure of group
Research evidence to support the role of dissenting peers in resisting obedience.
Gmason et al, 1982 higher levels of resistance in their study than Milgram.
Ppt were in groups to provide evidence to help an oil company run a smear
campaign. 29 out of 33 groups rebelled.
Shows peer support is linked to greater resistance.
Research evidence to support link between LOC and resistance to obedience
Evidence: Holland 1967, repeated Milgram’s study and measured whether ppts had
internal or external LOC. 37% of ILOC didn’t continue to highest shock level. Only
23% of ELOC didn’t go to highest level.
Explanation: Internal people show greater resistance to authority
Link: increases validity of LOC explanation and our confidence that it can explain
resistance.
Not all research supports link between LOC and resistance
Twenge etal analysed American LOC studies over 40 years period. People became
more resistant but also more external.
If resistance were linked to internal LOC, we would expect ppl to become more
internal
Challenges the link between internal LOC and increasing resistance.
The role of LOC in resistance may have been exaggerated
Rotter says LOC only matters in novel situations
It has little influence over our behaviour in familiar situations where our previous
experiences will always be more important. People who obey in specific situations in
the past are more likely to do so again, even if they have a high internal LOC.
Often overlooked in discussions of LOC and resistance
LOC relates to normative influence but not informational
Spector 1983 measured LOC and predisposition to normative and informational
social influence.
Found significant correlation between LOC (external) and predisposition to
normative social influence. But no correlation to informational social influence.
LOC is a limited explanation, not significant factor for this type of conformity.
