Is freedom contagious? A self-regulatory model of reactance and sensitivity to deviant peers.

Abstract

Psychological reactance is typically assumed to motivate resistance to controlling peer influences and societal prohibitions. However, some peer influences encourage behaviors prohibited by society. We consider whether reactant individuals are sensitive to such opportunities to enhance their autonomy. We specifically propose a self-regulatory perspective on reactance, wherein freedom/autonomy is the superordinate goal, and thus highly reactant individuals will be sensitive to peer influences that could enhance their behavioral freedoms. In two studies, we find that reactant individuals can be cooperative in response to autonomy-supportive peer influences. Participants read a scenario in which a peer’s intentions to engage in substance use were manipulated to imply freedom of choice or not. Results indicated that highly reactant participants were sensitive to deviant peers whose own behavior towards alcohol (Study 1, N = 160) or marijuana (Study 2, N = 124) appeared to be motivated by autonomy and thus afforded free choice. Altogether, the results support a self-regulatory model of reactance, wherein deviant peer influence can be a means to pursue autonomy.

Frustration-affirmation? Thwarted goals motivate compliance with social norms for violence and nonviolence.

“…The present research also treated social norms as standards to follow, but sometimes, norms can be reference points for departure: some individuals may seek to outperform a given norm, perhaps in the pursuit of excellence—and perhaps toward extremism. Others might react against social norms when they are too controlling, or they might reject mainstream norms and instead comply with alternative social norms that create the illusion of deviance (Leander et al, 2016; Matsuda et al, 2013). For some frustrated individuals, the available norms may not suffice to address their needs, motivating them to seek alternatives.…”

A 50-year review of psychological reactance theory: Do not read this article.

“…Despite these descriptions, the centrality of motivation to PRT remained relatively dormant until Miron and Brehm (2006) placed it alongside other theories with distinct motivational bents (e.g., energization model of motivation, Brehm & Self, 1989). This suggestion prompted a range of similar perspectives Wright, Agtarap, and Mlynski (2015), as Steindl, Jonas, Sittenthaler, et al (2015) devoted a section of their review to Reactance as Motivation , and Leander et al (2016) discussed PRT in the context of self-determination theory (Deci & Ryan, 2000), among other motivational frameworks.…”

Peer effects on control-averse behavior

“…Finally, a recent study has proposed that individuals might follow a deviant peer’s behavior as a form of restoring their freedom of choice 18 . The authors found that individuals with higher HPRS scores were more likely to comply with a peer’s request to engage in deviant behavior, such as drinking.…”

“…We predicted that, in comparison to the group without peer influence, observing a strongly control-averse peer would increase the subjects’ control-averse behavior, whereas observing a weakly control-averse peer would decrease the subjects’ control-averse behavior. Previous work has suggested that peer effects might be moderated by a general resistance to peer influence 17 or the general motivation to rebel against control 18 . To account for these individual characteristics, we assessed them using standardized questionnaires 17,19,20 .…”