Social Influence
- Resistance to Social Influence
Social Support (AO1)
Resisting Conformity - We can resist conformity if there is someone else who is non-
conforming, seen in Asch’s study where the dissenter acts as social support
Resisting Obedience - In one of Milgram’s variations, the obedience rate dropped from
65% - 10% when the genuine participant was joined by a disobedient confederate. The
disobedient participant challenges legitimacy to authority, allowing others to disobey
Locus of Control (Rotter 1966) (AO1)
Internal- People believe that they are in control and responsible for their outcomes, and are
more likely to resist social pressure
External- People believe that they are not in control and irresponsible for their outcomes,
and are less likely to resist social pressure
Real-world Support (Strength) (AO3)
- Albrecht et al (2006) evaluated Teen Fresh Start USA, an 8-week programme to help
pregnant adolescents resist peer pressure to smoke.
- Social support was provided by an older ‘buddy’, and at the end of the programme
those who had a ‘buddy’ were significantly less likely to smoke than those who didn't
have a buddy
- Therefore, social support has real world benefits
Research Support for dissenting peers (Strength) (AO3)
- Gamson et al’s (1982) participants were told to produce evidence that would be used
to help an oil company run a smear campaign
- The researchers found higher levels of resistance in their study than Milgram found in
his which was because participants were in groups so they could discuss what to do.
- 88% rebelled against their orders, which shows that peer support can lead to
disobedience by undermining legitimacy of authority
Research support for LoC (Strength) (AO3)
- Holland (1967) repeated Milgram’s baseline study and measured weather
participants were internal or external. He found that 37% of internals didn't continue
to 450 volts and 23% of externals did not continue
- This shows that resistance can be related to Loc, which increases the validity of LoC
Contradictory research (Limitation) (AO3)
- Twenge et al (2004) analysed date from American LoC studies conducted over 40
years.
- The data showed that people become more resistant to obedience but also more
external, this is unusual as they should become more internal
- This suggests that LoC theory is not a fully valid explanation of resistance to social
influence
- Resistance to Social Influence
Social Support (AO1)
Resisting Conformity - We can resist conformity if there is someone else who is non-
conforming, seen in Asch’s study where the dissenter acts as social support
Resisting Obedience - In one of Milgram’s variations, the obedience rate dropped from
65% - 10% when the genuine participant was joined by a disobedient confederate. The
disobedient participant challenges legitimacy to authority, allowing others to disobey
Locus of Control (Rotter 1966) (AO1)
Internal- People believe that they are in control and responsible for their outcomes, and are
more likely to resist social pressure
External- People believe that they are not in control and irresponsible for their outcomes,
and are less likely to resist social pressure
Real-world Support (Strength) (AO3)
- Albrecht et al (2006) evaluated Teen Fresh Start USA, an 8-week programme to help
pregnant adolescents resist peer pressure to smoke.
- Social support was provided by an older ‘buddy’, and at the end of the programme
those who had a ‘buddy’ were significantly less likely to smoke than those who didn't
have a buddy
- Therefore, social support has real world benefits
Research Support for dissenting peers (Strength) (AO3)
- Gamson et al’s (1982) participants were told to produce evidence that would be used
to help an oil company run a smear campaign
- The researchers found higher levels of resistance in their study than Milgram found in
his which was because participants were in groups so they could discuss what to do.
- 88% rebelled against their orders, which shows that peer support can lead to
disobedience by undermining legitimacy of authority
Research support for LoC (Strength) (AO3)
- Holland (1967) repeated Milgram’s baseline study and measured weather
participants were internal or external. He found that 37% of internals didn't continue
to 450 volts and 23% of externals did not continue
- This shows that resistance can be related to Loc, which increases the validity of LoC
Contradictory research (Limitation) (AO3)
- Twenge et al (2004) analysed date from American LoC studies conducted over 40
years.
- The data showed that people become more resistant to obedience but also more
external, this is unusual as they should become more internal
- This suggests that LoC theory is not a fully valid explanation of resistance to social
influence
