Resistance to social influence | AQA A-Level Psychology Revision
Updated: Sep 9
For 7182 specification, first teach in September 2025
AQA A-Level Psychology | Free Revision Notes
Estimated study time: 40 minutes
These Resistance to social influence A-Level Psychology revision notes explain why people do not always conform to a majority or obey an authority figure. You will explore how social support can make resistance easier and how locus of control may affect a person’s willingness to behave independently. This lesson builds on your understanding of group unanimity and conformity and situational influences on obedience. Learning to identify each explanation in unfamiliar scenarios is essential for strong application answers.
Learning Objectives 🎯
By the end of this revision page, you should be able to:
Define resistance to social influence.
Explain how social support increases resistance to conformity.
Explain how social support increases resistance to obedience.
Distinguish between an internal and an external locus of control.
Explain why an internal locus of control may increase resistance.
Apply both explanations to unfamiliar situations involving conformity and obedience.
Revision Notes đź“š
Resistance to social influence A-Level Psychology revision overview
Resistance to social influence occurs when a person withstands pressure to conform to a group or obey an authority figure.
Resistance may involve:
Giving an independent response despite majority pressure.
Refusing to carry out an authority figure’s order.
Continuing to act according to personal beliefs.
Accepting personal responsibility for a decision.
Challenging a group norm or social hierarchy.
The AQA specification identifies two explanations for resistance:
Social support
Locus of control
Social support is primarily a situational explanation because it depends on the presence and behaviour of other people.
Locus of control is a dispositional explanation because it focuses on a relatively stable characteristic within the individual.
Social support
Social support occurs when the presence or behaviour of another person makes resistance to social influence easier.
In this topic, social support does not simply mean emotional reassurance or friendship. It refers specifically to another person who:
Refuses to conform.
Disobeys an authority.
Questions the group’s position.
Demonstrates that independent behaviour is possible.
Reduces the individual’s sense of isolation.
Social support can increase resistance to both conformity and obedience, although it operates slightly differently in each case.
Social support and resistance to conformity
Conformity is more likely when a person faces a unanimous majority, meaning that every other group member gives the same response.
An ally or dissenter breaks this unanimity by giving a different response.
The dissenter may increase resistance because they:
Show that the majority is not completely united.
Demonstrate that disagreement is possible.
Reduce the pressure to gain the majority’s approval.
Make the individual feel less isolated.
Give the individual greater confidence in their own judgement.
The likely process is:
A person faces a unanimous majority.
They experience pressure to agree.
Another person disagrees with the majority.
The group is no longer unanimous.
The person feels supported in giving an independent response.
Conformity becomes less likely.
This develops the finding that breaking unanimity reduces conformity.
Does the dissenter need to give the correct answer?
The dissenter does not necessarily have to agree with the individual or give the objectively correct answer.
The important feature is often that they break the majority’s unanimity.
For example, imagine that a majority chooses answer A. The genuine participant believes that answer B is correct. A dissenter chooses answer C.
Although the dissenter has not supported answer B, they have shown that the majority can be challenged. The genuine participant may therefore feel more confident giving their own answer.
This suggests that social support works partly by reducing the majority’s social power rather than simply providing the correct information.
Applying social support to conformity
A group of students says that a new school policy is a good idea. Priya disagrees but is reluctant to speak because everyone else appears supportive. Another student then criticises the policy, after which Priya expresses her own concerns.
Social support can explain Priya’s resistance because:
The second student has broken the group’s unanimity.
Priya is no longer the only potential dissenter.
Disagreement now appears socially possible.
The pressure to agree with the majority has been reduced.
A weak answer would state:
Priya has social support because someone agrees with her.
A stronger answer would explain:
The other student breaks the majority’s unanimity, making Priya feel less isolated and more confident in expressing her own independent judgement.
Social support and resistance to obedience
Social support can also increase resistance to obedience.
A person may be more likely to disobey when they observe someone else:
Refusing an authority’s order.
Questioning the authority’s right to command.
Accepting personal responsibility.
Acting as a disobedient role model.
Demonstrating that refusal is possible.
A disobedient role model provides an example of how to resist an authority figure.
The process can be summarised as follows:
An authority gives an order.
The individual feels pressure to obey.
Another person refuses or challenges the order.
The authority’s control appears less absolute.
The individual gains confidence to refuse.
Obedience becomes less likely.
Why does a disobedient role model reduce obedience?
A disobedient role model may:
Show that the authority can be challenged.
Make the consequences of refusal appear less severe.
Reduce the individual’s fear of being the only person who resists.
Encourage the individual to accept personal responsibility.
Weaken the authority’s apparent legitimacy.
Help the person move towards an autonomous state.
This connects social support with the agentic and autonomous states.
When an individual sees someone else disobey, they may stop viewing themselves only as an agent of the authority. They may instead make an independent decision and accept responsibility for their own behaviour.
Applying social support to obedience
A supervisor tells three employees to alter information in a report. One employee immediately refuses and explains that each person is responsible for the accuracy of their own work. A second employee, who had been preparing to comply, also refuses.
The first employee provides social support because:
They act as a disobedient role model.
Their refusal shows that the supervisor can be challenged.
The second employee is no longer resisting alone.
The second employee may feel more confident accepting personal responsibility.
A strong application answer explains the effect of the model rather than merely identifying that two people refused.
Comparing social support in conformity and obedience
Resistance to conformity | Resistance to obedience |
An ally or dissenter breaks the group’s unanimity | A disobedient role model refuses an authority’s instruction |
Majority pressure is weakened | The authority’s control or legitimacy may be challenged |
The person feels less isolated from the group | The person feels less isolated in refusing |
Independent judgement becomes easier | Autonomous action becomes easier |
Conformity becomes less likely | Obedience becomes less likely |
In both cases, social support demonstrates that resistance is possible.
The main difference is the source of the original pressure:
Conformity involves pressure from a group.
Obedience involves a direct order from an authority.
Social support does not guarantee resistance
Social support increases the likelihood of resistance, but it does not determine behaviour.
A person may still conform or obey when:
The majority is highly important to them.
The authority is perceived as extremely legitimate.
Refusal carries serious consequences.
The supporter later withdraws.
Other situational pressures remain powerful.
Use cautious language in examination answers:
Social support may make resistance more likely.
Avoid claiming:
Anyone with social support will resist.
Locus of control
Locus of control describes the extent to which a person believes that events are controlled by their own actions or by external forces.
It can be understood as a continuum between:
Internal locus of control
External locus of control
People are not necessarily entirely internal or entirely external. They may fall at different points on the continuum and may feel more internal in some situations than in others.
Internal locus of control
A person with an internal locus of control believes that outcomes are mainly influenced by their own decisions, actions and effort.
They are more likely to believe:
“My choices affect what happens.”
“I am responsible for my actions.”
“I can influence the outcome.”
“I should rely on my own judgement.”
“Success or failure is connected to what I do.”
An internal locus of control may make resistance more likely because the person:
Accepts personal responsibility.
Has greater confidence in their judgement.
Is less dependent on other people’s approval.
Believes they can control their own behaviour.
Is more willing to make an independent decision.
External locus of control
A person with an external locus of control believes that outcomes are mainly controlled by forces outside themselves.
These external influences may include:
Luck
Fate
Chance
Powerful other people
Circumstances beyond personal control
They may be more likely to believe:
“There is little I can do to change the outcome.”
“Powerful people decide what happens.”
“Whether I succeed depends mostly on luck.”
“The situation is outside my control.”
A person with a more external locus may be less likely to resist because they may:
Feel that they have little control over the situation.
Depend more heavily on the guidance of others.
Place responsibility on an authority.
Feel less able to influence the consequences of refusal.
However, an external locus does not mean that someone will always conform or obey.
Locus of control as a continuum
It is inaccurate to treat internal and external locus of control as two completely separate personality types.
A person may:
Be strongly internal.
Be moderately internal.
Fall near the middle of the continuum.
Be moderately external.
Be strongly external.
The same individual may also respond differently depending on the situation.
For example, someone may feel in control of their academic progress but believe that workplace decisions are controlled entirely by senior management.
The concept is therefore about the person’s general beliefs regarding control, not a rigid label that perfectly predicts every action.
Why an internal locus of control may increase resistance
Personal responsibility
An internal person believes that their actions affect outcomes. They are therefore more likely to accept responsibility for deciding whether an instruction is right or wrong.
This may reduce the likelihood of entering or remaining in an agentic state.
Independent judgement
Internals may rely more heavily on their own assessment of a situation rather than automatically accepting the judgement of a group or authority.
This makes them better able to maintain an independent response.
Confidence
A belief in personal control may give a person greater confidence that their resistance can make a difference.
By contrast, someone who believes the situation is controlled entirely by powerful others may see resistance as pointless.
Reduced dependence on approval
An internal person may be less dependent on the approval of a group. This can make normative pressure less influential.
The connection can be summarised as:
Internal locus of control → greater personal responsibility and confidence → more independent judgement → greater likelihood of resistance
Applying locus of control to conformity
Kai’s friends pressure him to copy their answers during an assessment. Kai refuses, explaining that his final result should reflect his own choices and effort.
Kai’s resistance may be explained by an internal locus of control because:
He believes his actions influence his outcome.
He accepts responsibility for his own result.
He relies on his own judgement rather than the group’s behaviour.
The scenario does not need to use the words “internal locus of control”. You must infer it from the person’s beliefs about responsibility and personal control.
Applying locus of control to obedience
A manager tells Rosa to ignore an important safety check. Rosa refuses because she believes she is responsible for any work she completes and can choose whether to follow the instruction.
Rosa may have an internal locus of control because:
She accepts personal responsibility.
She believes she controls her own behaviour.
She does not transfer responsibility entirely to the manager.
She acts according to her own judgement.
This behaviour may also show an autonomous state. A strong response can identify both ideas while explaining them separately.
Comparing social support and locus of control
Social support | Locus of control |
Primarily a situational explanation | Primarily a dispositional explanation |
Depends on the presence and actions of another person | Depends on the individual’s beliefs about control |
Includes allies, dissenters and disobedient role models | Includes internal and external orientations |
Reduces isolation and demonstrates resistance | Encourages personal responsibility and independent judgement |
Can change when supporters appear or disappear | May be relatively stable across situations |
Explains why resistance becomes easier in a particular social setting | Explains why some people may be more likely to resist than others |
How social support and locus of control may interact
The two explanations are not mutually exclusive.
An internal person may already be relatively willing to resist, but the presence of an ally could make resistance even easier.
Similarly, a person with a more external locus might still resist when they observe several other people challenging the authority.
For example:
An internal locus may provide the personal confidence to question an order.
Social support may provide the situational reassurance needed to refuse publicly.
An interaction between the person and the situation may therefore provide a more complete explanation than either factor alone.
Evaluating social support
Research into conformity supports the explanation
Asch’s variations showed that conformity decreased when the majority was no longer unanimous.
This supports social support because the presence of a dissenter made it easier for the participant to give an independent response.
The dissenter did not necessarily need to provide the correct answer. This suggests that breaking unanimity itself reduces majority pressure.
Research into obedience supports the explanation
Milgram also used variations in which participants observed other people refusing to continue.
Obedience decreased when disobedient role models were present.
This supports the idea that seeing someone challenge an authority gives an individual confidence to resist.
Controlled research helps identify cause and effect
A strength of these variations is that the researcher could alter the presence of social support while keeping other aspects of the procedure similar.
If resistance increases when an ally or disobedient model is introduced, this suggests that social support contributed to the behavioural change.
The situations may be artificial
A limitation is that line judgements and apparent electric-shock procedures are unusual situations.
Resistance in everyday life may involve:
Meaningful personal relationships.
Long-term consequences.
Genuine risks.
Strong organisational hierarchies.
Moral or legal decisions.
This means the strength of social support may differ outside a controlled research setting.
Evaluating locus of control
It explains individual differences
Locus of control helps explain why people facing similar social pressure may respond differently.
One person may accept personal responsibility and resist, while another may believe that powerful others control the outcome and obey.
This makes locus of control a useful dispositional explanation.
It does not determine behaviour
Locus of control cannot perfectly predict whether someone will resist.
A person with an internal locus may still obey when:
The authority appears highly legitimate.
The consequences of resistance are serious.
The individual lacks social support.
The authority is physically close.
A person with an external locus may resist when a strong ally or disobedient model is present.
Locus of control should therefore be treated as one influence among several.
A relationship does not prove causation
If researchers find that internality is associated with resistance, this does not automatically prove that locus of control causes independent behaviour.
Another factor could contribute to both. The direction of the relationship may also be unclear.
For example, repeated experiences of successfully resisting pressure could strengthen a person’s belief that they control events.
Situational explanations may sometimes be stronger
Milgram’s and Asch’s variations demonstrate that changes in the immediate situation can produce changes in resistance.
This suggests that personality alone cannot explain behaviour. Social support, unanimity, proximity and legitimacy of authority may sometimes have a stronger influence.
A balanced conclusion is that resistance is most likely to be understood through both:
Dispositional factors, such as locus of control.
Situational factors, such as social support.
Applying both explanations to one scenario
Consider the following scenario:
A group of employees is told to sign an inaccurate document. Malik initially remains silent because everyone else appears willing to sign. Sophie refuses and states that each person is responsible for checking the information. Malik then refuses too, explaining that he must make his own decision.
Social support can explain Malik’s resistance because Sophie acts as a disobedient role model. Her refusal shows that resistance is possible and prevents Malik from being the only person challenging the instruction.
Locus of control may also explain his behaviour because Malik accepts responsibility and states that he must make his own decision. This suggests an internal locus of control.
A developed answer should connect each scenario detail to the relevant explanation rather than merely naming both terms.
Hints from the Examiner Reports đź’ˇ
Examiner hint: Naming social support or locus of control is not enough. Explain how the factor produces resistance.
Examiner hint: Use specialist terminology accurately. For social support, terms such as ally, dissenter, unanimity and disobedient role model help make the explanation precise.
Examiner hint: When applying social support, explain what the other person actually does. A phrase such as “they had support” is too vague without reference to disagreement or disobedience.
Examiner hint: For locus of control, state whether the person has an internal or external orientation. Referring only to “their locus of control” does not explain the behaviour.
Examiner hint: Application must use the scenario details. Explain how a person’s statement about responsibility, choice or control demonstrates an internal locus.
Examiner hint:Â Research evidence should be linked to the explanation. Do not simply describe an Asch or Milgram variation without explaining how the findings support social support.
Examiner hint:Â In extended answers, distinguish between resisting conformity and resisting obedience. An ally breaks majority unanimity, whereas a disobedient role model challenges an authority.
Common Mistakes ⚠️
Mistake: Defining social support as friendship or emotional comfort
Why this is incorrect:
In this topic, social support refers specifically to another person whose independent or disobedient behaviour makes resistance easier.
How to improve:
Refer to an ally, dissenter or disobedient role model and explain how they reduce social pressure.
Mistake: Saying that an ally must give the same answer as the participant
Why this is incorrect:
A dissenter may reduce conformity simply by breaking the majority’s unanimity, even if their response differs from the participant’s answer.
How to improve:
Focus on the fact that the majority is no longer completely united.
Mistake: Claiming that social support guarantees resistance
Why this is incorrect:
Other pressures may remain powerful. An authority may still be legitimate, or group membership may remain highly important.
How to improve:
State that social support increases the likelihood of resistance.
Mistake: Using the same explanation for conformity and obedience without adapting it
Why this is incorrect:
Social support operates differently in each situation. In conformity, an ally breaks unanimity. In obedience, a role model demonstrates disobedience.
How to improve:
Identify whether the pressure comes from a majority or an authority figure.
Mistake: Treating locus of control as two fixed personality types
Why this is incorrect:
Internality and externality form a continuum. People can fall at different points and may respond differently across situations.
How to improve:
Describe someone as having a more internal or more external locus where appropriate.
Mistake: Saying that an internal person controls everything that happens
Why this is incorrect:
An internal locus is the belief that personal actions influence outcomes. It does not mean the person has complete control over every event.
How to improve:
Refer to personal responsibility, choice and influence rather than total control.
Mistake: Assuming that every internal person will resist
Why this is incorrect:
Powerful situational pressures can still produce conformity or obedience.
How to improve:
Explain that internality makes resistance more likely but does not determine behaviour.
Mistake: Assuming that every external person will conform or obey
Why this is incorrect:
An external person may still resist when social support is strong or the authority lacks legitimacy.
How to improve:
Treat locus of control as one factor interacting with the situation.
Mistake: Copying a scenario detail without explaining it
Why this is incorrect:
Writing that “Nadia says the choice is hers” does not fully apply locus of control.
How to improve:
Add the psychological link:
This suggests an internal locus because Nadia believes that she controls her own decision and accepts responsibility for its outcome.
Mistake: Giving generic research criticism
Why this is incorrect:
A statement such as “the study was artificial” does not explain whether the evidence supports social support or locus of control.
How to improve:
Explain how the artificial situation affects conclusions about resistance in everyday life.
Exam-Style Questions ✍️
Question 1
Which one of the following is most closely associated with an internal locus of control?
A. Believing that outcomes are determined entirely by luck
B. Accepting that powerful others control every decision
C. Believing that personal actions can influence outcomes
D. Following a group to avoid social rejection
[1 mark]
reveal mark scheme and indicative content
Answer: C. Believing that personal actions can influence outcomes
Question 2
Define social support in the context of resistance to social influence.
[2 marks]
reveal mark scheme and indicative content
Mark scheme
AO1 = 2
2 marks:Â Clear definition referring to the presence of others who resist conformity or obedience, making resistance easier.
1 mark:Â Limited or partial definition.
Indicative content
Having an ally who does not conform.
Observing a disobedient role model.
This can increase confidence to resist social influence.
Example answer
Social support occurs when another person resists group pressure or authority, giving an individual greater confidence to resist as well.
Question 3
Explain one difference between an internal and an external locus of control.
[3 marks]
reveal mark scheme and indicative content
Mark scheme
AO1 = 3
1 mark:Â Internal locus of control involves believing that personal actions influence outcomes.
1 mark:Â External locus of control involves believing that outcomes are controlled by luck, fate or powerful others.
1 mark:Â Clear comparison linked to resistance.
Example answer
People with an internal locus of control believe they have control over events in their lives, whereas people with an external locus believe outcomes depend more on luck, fate or powerful others. Internals are therefore generally more likely to resist social influence.
Question 4
Everyone in a friendship group says that they plan to miss an afternoon lesson. Alex does not want to join them but is reluctant to disagree. One friend then says that they will attend the lesson, after which Alex also decides to attend.
Explain Alex’s behaviour using social support.
[4 marks]
reveal mark scheme and indicative content
Mark scheme
AO2 = 4
Award 1 mark each for:
Identifying the friend's decision to attend as social support.
Explaining that this breaks the group's unanimity.
Explaining that Alex no longer has to stand alone against the group.
Linking this to increased confidence to resist conformity.
Example answer
Initially Alex has no social support because the group is unanimous about missing the lesson. When one friend says they will attend, the unanimity is broken and Alex gains an ally. This reduces the pressure to conform and gives Alex greater confidence to attend the lesson too.
Question 5
A team leader instructs several employees to remove unfavourable results from a report. One employee refuses. After witnessing the refusal, two other employees also challenge the instruction.
Explain how social support may have increased resistance to obedience.
[4 marks]
reveal mark scheme and indicative content
Mark scheme
AO2 = 4
Award 1 mark each for:
The first employee acts as a disobedient role model.
Their refusal demonstrates that resistance is possible.
This provides social support to the other employees.
The support increases their confidence to challenge the team leader.
Example answer
The employee who refuses provides social support by acting as a disobedient role model. Their refusal shows the others that it is possible to challenge the team leader. This increases the other employees' confidence to resist the instruction themselves.
Question 6
Hannah refuses to follow a manager’s unsafe instruction. She says, “I am responsible for the work I complete, and I decide whether I am willing to do it.”
Explain Hannah’s behaviour using locus of control.
[4 marks]
reveal mark scheme and indicative content
Mark scheme
AO2 = 4
Award 1 mark each for:
Identifying an internal locus of control.
Hannah believes she controls her own actions.
She accepts personal responsibility for her behaviour.
This makes her more likely to rely on her own judgement and resist the manager.
Example answer
Hannah appears to have an internal locus of control because she believes that she controls her own actions and is responsible for their consequences. She therefore relies on her own judgement rather than automatically following the manager, making her more able to resist the unsafe instruction.
Question 7
A psychologist investigated resistance to group pressure under three conditions.
Condition | Group arrangement | Percentage giving an independent response |
A | Unanimous majority | 18% |
B | One group member disagreed with the majority | 52% |
C | Two group members disagreed with the majority | 69% |
Describe the pattern shown in the table. Use social support to explain the difference between Conditions A and C.
[6 marks]
reveal mark scheme and indicative content
Mark scheme
AO2 = 6
Award up to 3 marks for the pattern and 3 marks for the explanation.
Indicative content
Pattern
Independent responses are lowest with a unanimous majority, 18%.
Independence increases to 52%Â when one person disagrees.
It rises further to 69%Â when two people disagree.
Explanation
In Condition A there is no ally, so pressure to conform is stronger.
In Condition C two people provide social support.
Their disagreement breaks unanimity and gives the participant greater confidence to resist the majority.
Example answer
Independent responding increases as the amount of social support increases, from 18% with a unanimous majority to 52% with one dissenter and 69% with two dissenters. In Condition A there is no ally, so pressure to conform is strong. In Condition C two people resist the majority, providing social support and increasing confidence to give an independent response.
Question 8
Explain one similarity and one difference between social support and locus of control as explanations of resistance to social influence.
[6 marks]
reveal mark scheme and indicative content
Mark scheme
AO1 = 6
Award up to 3 marks for the similarity and 3 marks for the difference.
Indicative content
Similarity
Both explain why some people resist conformity and/or obedience.
Both can increase independent behaviour rather than simply following a group or authority.
Difference
Social support is a situational explanation, depending on the presence and behaviour of other people.
Locus of control is a dispositional explanation, based on an individual's beliefs about control over events.
Example answer
One similarity is that both social support and an internal locus of control can make resistance to conformity or obedience more likely. Both therefore help explain independent behaviour. One difference is that social support is situational because resistance depends on the presence of an ally or disobedient role model. Locus of control is dispositional because it depends on the individual's beliefs about how much control they have over events.
Question 9
A group of trainee staff is instructed to carry out a procedure they believe may be unsafe. Most of the group prepares to comply.
Owen refuses and says that every trainee must take responsibility for their own decision. Mia then refuses too, although she had previously felt unable to challenge the instructor.
Explain Owen’s and Mia’s resistance with reference to locus of control and social support.
[8 marks]
reveal mark scheme and indicative content
Mark scheme
AO2 = 8
7–8 marks: Application of locus of control and social support is clear, accurate and well developed. Both Owen and Mia are effectively explained.
5–6 marks: Application of both explanations is mostly effective, although some detail may be lacking.
3–4 marks: Some appropriate application, but explanation is limited or one explanation is stronger than the other.
1–2 marks: Very limited application.
0 marks:Â No relevant content.
Indicative content
Owen
His comments suggest an internal locus of control.
He believes individuals control their own decisions.
He accepts personal responsibility rather than placing responsibility on the instructor.
This makes him more likely to rely on his own judgement and resist.
Mia
Initially she feels unable to challenge the instructor.
Owen's refusal provides social support.
Owen acts as a disobedient role model and shows that resistance is possible.
This gives Mia greater confidence to refuse as well.
Example answer
Owen's resistance can be explained by an internal locus of control. He believes that each trainee controls their own decisions and should accept personal responsibility, so he relies on his own judgement and refuses the unsafe procedure. Mia's resistance can be explained by social support. Initially she feels unable to challenge the instructor, but Owen's refusal provides a disobedient role model. Seeing him resist shows Mia that resistance is possible and gives her greater confidence to refuse too.
Question 10
Discuss social support and locus of control as explanations of resistance to social influence.
[16 marks]
Comments