Locus of control
Personality can also influence a person's ability to resist conformity or obedience. Rotter (1966) proposed the concept of locus of control, which refers to the degree of control individuals believe they have over their own lives. This belief exists on a continuum ranging from high internal to high external.
People with a high internal locus of control believe that their actions and decisions directly determine their life outcomes. As a result, they tend to take personal responsibility for their behaviour, act more independently, and are less likely to conform or obey. In contrast, those with a high external locus of control believe their lives are shaped by external forces such as luck, fate, or the influence of others, making them more likely to give in to social pressure and less likely to behave independently.
EXAM HINT: Locus of control is about a person's perception of control, not the actual control they have. Students should refer to it as what individuals believe about the cause of their behaviour.
EVALUATING LOCUS OF CONTROL
RESEARCH SUPPORT (STRENGTH): One strength of locus of control as an explanation for resisting conformity is that it is supported by research evidence. For example, Spector (1983) used Rotter's locus of control scale to investigate the relationship between locus of control and conformity in a sample of 157 students. He found that participants with a high internal locus of control were less likely to conform than those with a high external locus of control when conformity was driven by normative social influence. However, there was no significant difference between the two groups in situations involving informational social influence. This suggests that people with an internal locus of control are more able to resist conformity when the pressure comes from a desire for social approval rather than a desire to be correct. It also shows that locus of control may be more important in some types of conformity than others. Therefore, Spector's findings support the view that an internal locus of control helps individuals resist normative social influence.
RESEARCH SUPPORT (STRENGTH): Another strength of locus of control as an explanation for resisting obedience is that it is supported by research evidence. For example, Oliner and Oliner (1998) interviewed non-Jewish people who had lived through the Second World War and compared 406 individuals who had protected Jewish people by resisting Nazi orders with 126 individuals who had followed orders. They found that the rescuers were more likely to show a high internal locus of control. This suggests that people who believe they are responsible for their own actions may be more likely to resist pressure from authority figures. However, the findings do not prove that locus of control was the only factor involved, as other influences may also have affected whether people obeyed or resisted. Therefore, while Oliner and Oliner's research supports the idea that an internal locus of control can help people resist obedience, it is unlikely to be the sole explanation.
CONTRADICTORY EVIDENCE (LIMITATION): One limitation of locus of control as an explanation for resistance to social influence is that there is contradictory evidence. For example, Twenge, Zhang and Im (2004) carried out a meta-analysis of studies over a period of more than 40 years and found that people have become more external in their locus of control over time. However, they also found that people have become more resistant to obedience. This suggests that an internal locus of control cannot fully explain resistance to social influence, because resistance appears to have increased even as people became more external. Therefore, other factors besides locus of control are also likely to influence whether people resist conformity or obedience.
ISSUES & DEBATES - THE NATURE-NURTURE DEBATE: The nature-nurture debate in the context of resistance to social influence involves two theories: social support and locus of control. Social support emphasises the importance of environmental factors such as having allies in resisting the pressure to conform or obey (nurture), while Rotter's theory of locus of control focuses on dispositional factors (nature). Although these two theories are often studied independently, it is important to consider how they may interact to enhance or diminish an individual's ability to resist social influence.