Resistance to social influence

Asch's research on conformity shows how diff it is to go against crows b/c humans have strong need to be accepted by group + also have desire to act in 'right' way.

Asch (1956) found presence of social support allows to resist conformity pressure from majority. One variation of study, intro of ally who gave right answer -> conformity levels dropped from 33% to 5.5%.

Most important aspect appears to be it breaks unanimous position of majority. Supporters + dissenters likely to be effective in reducing conformity b/c raises poss there are other, equally legitimate, ways of thinking/responding. Presence of ally provides independent assessment of reality, makes them feel more confident in decision + better able to stand up to majority.

Research shows individuals more confident in ability to resist temptation to obey if can find ally willing to joing them in opposing authority figure. Disobedient peers act as role models - individuals model their behaviour on them.

Individuals able to use defiance of peers as opp to extricate themselves from having to cause further harm to victim as result of obedience. Eg, one of M's variations, participant was one of 3 in a team testing learner. Other 2 were confederates, refused to continue shocking learner + withdrew. Defiance had influence on real participants, only 10% continuing to max 450v shock level.

Locus of control - person's perception of personal control over own behaviour. Measured along dimension of 'high internal' to 'high external', most would be b/ween 2 extremes. Strong internal LoC associated w/ belief can control events in our life. People w/ internal LoC believe what happens largely consequence of own ability + effort. More likely to display independence in thought + behaviour. High in internality rely less on opinion of others, means better able to resist social influence.

External LoC tend to believe what happens to them determined by external factors, eg influences of others/luck. Have a sense things 'just happen to them', largely out of their contro. High in externality approach events w/ more passive + fatalistic attitude than internals - less personal responsibility for actions + being less likely to display independent behaviour + more likely to accept influence of others.

LoC research uncovered number of characteristics of internals - have relevance for resisting social influence:
 - High internals active seekers of info useful to them, less likely to rely on opinions of others - makes them less vulnerable to social influence
 - High internals more achievement-oriented, more likley to become leaders. Spector (1982) found relationship exists b/ween LoC + leadership style, internals more persuasive + goal-oriented than externals
 - High internals better able to resist coercion. Eg, in simulated prisoner-of-war camp situation, internals better able to resist attempts of interrogator to gian ingo. More intense the pressure, greater the diff b/ween internal's performance + that of external's (Hutchins + Estey, 1978).

Rosenstrasse protest - 1943, German women protested in the Rosenstrasse in Berlin, Gestapo  holding 2,000 Jewish men, most married to non-Jewish partners, or male children of 'mixed' marriages. Women toe-to-toe w/ Gestapo agents, who threatened to open fire if didn't leave, demanded release of husbands + sons. Dspite threats, Jews set free. Illustration of M's research. M found presence of disobedient peers gave participant confidence + courage to resist authority's orders. Women defied authority together.

Avtgis (1998) meta-analysis of studies of relationsip b/ween LoC + diff forms of social influence inc conformity. Showed pos correlation for relationship b/ween scores of internality/externality + scores on measure of persuations, SI + conformity. Analysis showed individuals who scored higher on external LoC tend to be more easily persuaded, more easily influenced + more conforming than those who score as internal.

Allen + Levine (19710 - one condition, confederate wore glasses w/ tick lenses - invalid social support, given it was test of visual discrimination. In 2nd, confederate had normal vision - valid social support. Both conditions reduced amount of confomrity, but valid more impact - ally is helpful, but more if perceived valid social support.

Spector (1983) measured LoC + predisposition of normative + informational influence in 157 undergrads. Found correlation b/ween LoC + predisposition to NSI, w/ externals more likely to conform to this form of influence than internals. Found no relationship for predisposition to ISI, LoC not appearing to be signif factor in type of conformity.

Research suggests historical trend in LoC - meta-analysis, Twenge et al (2004) found young Americans increasingly believed fate more determined by luck + powerful others than own actions. Researchers found LoC scores more substantially external in student + child samples b/ween 1960 + 2002. Interprets trend in terms of alienation experienced by young people + tendency to explain misfortunes on outside forces.