Individual differences in independent behaviour Social Influence

Independent behaviour: Personality Rotter (1966) developed a questionnaire to measure a personality characteristic called locus of control. It indicates how much personal control people believe they have over events in their lives. The questionnaire involved choosing between paired statements like these ones: 1.) Misfortune is usually brought about by people’s own actions 2.) Things that make us unhappy are largely due to bad luck.

Internal locus of control If you agree with the statement, ‘misfortune is usually brought about by people’s own actions’ you have an internal locus of control. This is categorised by a belief that what happens in your life results from your own behaviour or actions. E.g. if you did well in a test you might put it down to how much work you did for it.

External locus of control If you agree with the statement, ‘things that make us unhappy are largely due to bad luck’ you have an external locus of control. This is a belief that events are caused by external factors, like luck or the actions of others. E.g. if you did well in a test you might put it down to good questions coming up, or a lenient examiner.

Independent behaviour explained? People with an internal locus of control feel a stronger sense of control over their lives than people with an external locus of control. This means that they are more likely to exhibit independent behaviour. People with an external locus of control may be more likely to conform.

Attributional style Attributional style is a personality attribute that indicates how people explain to themselves why they experience a particular event. When people are confronted with situations of success and failure they make causal attributions about these events and learn from experience, thus developing a particular attributional style.

Components in attributional style Psychologists have identified 3 components in attributional style: personal permanent pervasive

Components in attributional style Personal (i.e. dispositional vs. situational). An individual may see themselves as the cause of an event or may attribute the cause to situational factors e.g. ‘I failed my A level because I’m stupid’ (dispositional, internal) or ‘I failed my A level because I used the wrong textbook’ (situational, external)

Components in attributional style Permanent (i.e. stable vs. unstable). An individual may see the situation as unchangeable or changeable, e.g. ‘It’s pointless having another go at my A levels, I’m just going to fail again’ (stable) or ‘Next time it’ll be different’ (unstable)

Components in attributional style Pervasive (i.e. global vs. local). An individual may see the situation as affecting all aspects of their life or being restricted to just that event, e.g. ‘I can’t seem to do anything right’ or ‘Never mind, I can concentrate on my other subjects’.

Relating it to obedience/conformity 1. High ‘internals’ are active seekers of useful information, so have less need to rely on the opinion of the group 2. High ‘internals’ tend to be more achievement focused, so are more likely to take the lead in situations 3. High ‘internals’ are more able to resist pressure from others, as they don’t need them Would this relate more to conformity or obedience or both?

Positive and negative attributional styles Negative attributional style (dispositional) - Some people generally blame themselves for negative events (such as academic failure), believing that such events will continue indefinitely, and tending to let this negativity affect many different aspects of their lives. Positive attributional style (situational) - people who generally blame others for negative events believe that negative events are fairly transient. They do not let the negative events affect too many aspects of their lives

Positive attributional style The positive attributional style is synonymous with independent behaviour the person is able to resist the influence of negative life experiences that might otherwise have an adverse influence on their approach to such events in the future.

Research evidence Holland (1967) used Milgram’s electric shock procedure to investigate the link between locus of control and obedience, but found no relationship. However Blass (1991) reanalysed Holland’s data and found, using modern statistical analysis techniques, that people with an internal locus of control were more likely to resist obeying than those with an external locus of control. Participants with an internal locus of control were especially resistant to obedience if they suspected they were being coerced or manipulated by the experimenter.

Research evidence A study by Schurz (1985) using Austrian participants who were asked to give increasingly painful bursts of ultrasound to a learner, and who were told that the highest level could cause skin damage, revealed no link between locus of control and obedience among the 80% of participants that went all the way to the maxim ultrasound level. However, the participants who were classed as having an internal locus of control tended to take more responsibility for their actions than those with an external locus of control.

Research evidence Blass (1991) reviewed many studies of locus of control and independent behaviour, and concluded that there is no clear link between the two as many studies supported a link and others found no link. There is, however tentative evidence that participants with an internal locus of control are more able to resist pressures to obey than those with an external locus of control.

Research on attributional style Heaven et al (2005) studied young adolescents in Australia to see if there was an association between attributional style and attitude to school. They found significant differences between self- identified studious students (those who conformed to school, rules and worked hard) and rebel students (those who rebelled against teachers and did not always do homework).

You can take the ‘optimism test’ (an attributional style questionnaire) online at: www.authentichappiness.org/ .