SOCIAL - Explanations of resistance to social influence
- Created by: EmilyEther
- Created on: 22-11-18 10:27
View mindmap
- Explanations of resistance to social influence
- Resistance
- independence
- a lack of consistent movement either towards or away from social expectancy
- anti-conformity
- a consistent movement away from social conformity
- adopting group behaviours and norms of a minority
- independence
- Locus of Control (LoC)
- propsed by Rotter (1966)
- def: the extent to which individs believe that they are in control of their lives
- INTERNAL LOC: believing that things happen as a result of an individ's actions or decisions - feeling of empowerment, 'what I do makes a difference'
- more resistant to social pressure - see themselves in control of situation
- EXTERNAL LOC: belief that things happen due to luck - feeling of disempowerment, fatalism
- RESISTING CONFORMITY: Spector (1983) - gave Rotter's LoC scale to 157 Uni students, PPs with high LoC conformed more than people with low LoC, but only in situations that produced more normative social pressure (NSI). Both types didn't conform to ISI
- people with less of a need to be accepted into social group will be more able to resist social influence
- RESISTING CONFORMITY: Moghaddam (1998) - Chinese people conform more than Americans (more external LoC). Cross cultural differences
- RESISTING OBEDIENCE: Holland (1967) no relationship between LoC and obedience
- RESISTING OBEDIENCE: Blass (1991) reanalysed Holland's study. PPs with IntLoC more disobedient that ExtLoC people. IntLoC expecially resistant when felt as if they were being manipulated by researcher
- Social Support
- dissent
- reduces CONFORMITY
- Asch variation - confed became dissenter early on, conformity dropped from 32% to 5.5%. If confed dissents later, c = 8.5%. Early S.S is more effective
- sense of moral support
- if social support kicks in earlier, it will be more powerful
- disobedient models
- reduces OBEDIENCE
- model disobedience for others
- Milgram variation: 2 confeds with genuine PP, only 10% gave full shock
- dissent
- Resistance to conformity
- Reactance
- when freedom of choice is restricted, reactance (rebellious anger) and resistance occurs
- Hamilton (2005) - Australian teens. One group (low-reactance conditions) told they could smoke if they know the dangers. One group (high-react conditions) told couldn't smoke at all. High-react group smoked more
- Status
- people with low status are more conforming - want group acceptance
- people with high status (and aware of) are less likely to conform
- Richardson (2009) - people less likely to conform if they percieve the other as lower status
- Reactance
- Resistance to obedience
- systematic processing
- less likely to obey orders with negative outcome if they have time to think about the consequences
- institutional settings: (military) require you not to think and act immediately - need immediate obedience
- Martin (2007) - when PPs were encouraged to think about the consequences of an unreasonable order, less likely to obey
- morality
- individs who make decisions based on moral code are moe resistant to obedience than those who don't
- Milgram (1974) - one PPs who disobeyed said in post-interview that he was a vicar and obeying higher authority (God). Religious morality can decrease obedience
- Personality
- people who can empathise with the feelings of others are more able to resist orders with negative consequences
- Oliner and Oliner (1988) - those who sheltered Jews during the war had an upbringing with stressed social normas of helping othersand emphasised with Jews
- systematic processing
- Resistance
Comments
No comments have yet been made