Lesson 9 Resisting Social Influence Dispositional PDF

DISPOSITIONAL FACTORS in RESISTING SOCIAL INFLUENCE Starter - exam Q ON PAPER In a hospital, you are very likely to obey a nurse. However, if you meet them outside the hospital, for example in a shop, you are much less likely to obey. Using your knowledge of how people resist p...

DISPOSITIONAL FACTORS in RESISTING SOCIAL INFLUENCE Starter - exam Q ON PAPER In a hospital, you are very likely to obey a nurse. However, if you meet them outside the hospital, for example in a shop, you are much less likely to obey. Using your knowledge of how people resist pressures to obey, explain why you are less likely to obey the nurse outside the hospital. (4 marks) Mark scheme - peer mark AO2 = 4 Reasons why people are less likely to obey might include: Not accepting that the person giving the order has legitimate authority lack of uniform (symbol of authority) change of location (lacks legitimacy) Any other reason for resisting obedience which has been made relevant to the stem. Candidates could consider one reason in detail or more than one but in less detail. One mark for identifying the reason(s) and further marks for elaboration. Explaining conformity 2: External locus of control  Internal vs External Type of Characteristics How does this relate to LOC Social Influence? High level of High internals actively Internal personal control seek out information over their lives and which will help them behaviour. Take personally and are less personal likely to rely on others. responsibility for it. They are more ‘I made it happen!’ achievement orientated. They can resist pressure from others. The belief that life High Externals are more External is determined by likely to be influenced by external/environme others as they don’t ntal factors, such as believe they exercise luck. ‘Wrong place, personal control over  Summary of the influence of ILOC High internal locus of control means individuals take responsibility for their actions and see themselves as controlling their behaviour. This means they are less likely to obey unreasonable orders AND less likely to conform to behaviour of others if they feel it is wrong. Conversely, those with a high external control often feel that their actions make no difference and are therefore more likely to be obedient or conformist.  Holland (1967) Holland (1967) found no relationship between locus of control scores and obedience in variations of Milgram’s study. However, Blass (1991) re‐analysed Holland’s findings using new techniques, and found that those with a higher internal locus of control resisted pressures to obey, especially when they felt manipulated by the researcher.  Lack of ecological validity? Studies like the Atgis study often use procedures that are artificial and unlike real life. E.g Asch’s procedure is in a highly controlled environment and pps are asked to match lines which is not a realistic task. Therefore although the research supports the dispositional explanation, it may not be generalisable to real examples of independent behaviour e.g. whether an individual in the a jury would conform to the majority decision even if they disagree.  Too simplistic? Milgram’s variation studies found that situational factors such as proximity to the victim and social support from another disobedient person leads to a decrease in obedience (fall to ____% for close proximity and ___% with rebellious stooges) SO this means that personality factors like LOC alone cannot explain why people resist social influence. So REDUCTIONIST  Mixture? What is most likely is that people with a high internal locus of control are naturally better equipped to resist social influence BUT if situational pressures are strong then they may still conform or obey. This would explain why obedience in Milgram’s variation is never 100% and never 0%.