Social support

One way people can resist social influence is by having an ally who supports their perspective. This support can enhance their confidence and enable them to maintain independence. Having an ally can also reduce the fear of being ridiculed and enable individuals to avoid normative social influence. Additionally, individuals who have support for their point of view are less likely to obey orders, as they feel more empowered to resist pressure when another person refuses to comply.

EVALUATING SOCIAL SUPPORT

RESEARCH SUPPORT (STRENGTH): One strength of social support as an explanation for resisting conformity is that it is supported by research evidence. For example, in one of Asch's (1951) variations, a confederate was told to give the correct answer throughout the task. In this condition, the conformity rate fell to just 5%. This suggests that having another person who supports your view can reduce the pressure to conform to the majority. Social support appears to weaken the influence of the group and make it easier for individuals to respond independently. Therefore, Asch's findings provide strong support for the idea that social support helps people resist conformity.

RESEARCH SUPPORT (STRENGTH): Another strength of social support as an explanation for resisting obedience is that it is supported by research evidence. For example, in one variation of Milgram's (1974) study, the participant was joined by two confederates who also acted as teachers. Both confederates refused to continue and withdrew from the experiment early. In this condition, the percentage of real participants who gave the maximum 450-volt shock fell from 65% in the original study to 10%. This suggests that seeing other people disobey an authority figure can make it easier for an individual to resist the pressure to obey. Social support appears to reduce the pressure to obey by showing that disobedience is possible. Therefore, Milgram's findings provide strong support for the idea that social support can help people resist obedience.

ALTERNATIVE EXPLANATIONS (LIMITATION): One limitation of social support as an explanation for resistance to social influence is that it focuses only on situational factors. It does not explain how dispositional factors, such as personality, may make some people more or less likely to resist pressure to obey or conform. For example, Rotter (1966) suggested that people with a high internal locus of control believe they have more control over their behaviour and are therefore more likely to resist social influence. This suggests that resistance cannot be explained by social support alone, because dispositional factors may also play an important role. Therefore, social support may provide only a partial explanation for why some people resist social influence.