Lesson 11 Minority Influence

Question 1

What is Minority Influence

Answer 1

Minority influence occurs very persuasive small groups, or even individuals, can change the way the majority behaves and thinks. This is known as minority influence. Moscovici (1985) considered minority influence to lead to conversion. Conversion is when individuals change their private beliefs and views because of minority influence.

Question 1

Why are minority groups most likely to be convincing

Answer 1

1. Committed - Commitment is shown when members of the minority demonstrate their dedication to their belief, perhaps by making sacrifices (augmentation principle) or by taking risks or being inconvenienced in some way. This shows that the minority is not acting out of self-interest.
2. Consistent – Consistency occurs when a minority repeatedly gives the same message over time. This makes a majority reassess their belief and consider the issue more carefully.
3. Flexible - Flexibility/being non-dogmatic is when a minority show they are willing to listen to other viewpoints. The majority will then listen to the minority point of view/take their argument more seriously.

Question 2

Process of minority influence

Answer 2

Minority influence initially has a small effect but then spreads as more and more people consider the issue being raised and are converted to the minority viewpoint. Eventually it reaches a tipping point, where the minority becomes the majority. This is known as the snowball effect. Minority influence is a slow process and may even be unconscious. Sometimes the individual is not even aware of where the new idea originated from, this is called social crypto-amnesia.

Question 3

What is the snowball effect

Answer 3

When the minority becomes the majority

Question 4

What is social crypto-amnesia

Answer 4

When the individual is unaware of where the new idea originated from

Question 5

Moscovici (1969)

Answer 5

Moscovici (1969) told 172 female participants that they were taking part in a colour perception task. The naïve participants were placed in groups of six and were shown 36 slides, which were varying shades of blue. Two of the six participants were confederates. The participants had to state out loud the colour of each slide. In the consistent condition the confederates said the slide was green in all 36 trials. In the inconsistent condition the confederates said that 24 of the slides were green and 12 were blue. In the consistent condition participants were swayed by the minority 8.2% of the time. In the inconsistent condition the participants only went along with the minority 1.25% of the time. This shows that a consistent minority is more effective than an inconsistent minority.

Question 6

Why are samples of studies into minority influence not good evidence

Answer 6

1. The samples of studies into minority influence are gender biased. For example, Moscovici (1969) only used women. As a result, we cannot conclude that male participants would respond to minority influence in the same way. Research often suggests that women are more likely to conform than men, therefore further research is needed to determine the effect of minority influence on male participants.
2. The samples of studies into minority influence are also culturally biased because all of the participants were from America. As a result, the findings cannot be generalised to other populations. We cannot conclude that participants from other cultures would respond to minority influence in the same way.
3. Most of the studies into minority influence are based on experiments conducted in laboratories. This raises the question of ecological validity. The participants in laboratory experiments are usually a collection of students who do not know each other, and will probably never meet again.
4. Studies into minority influence have been criticised for deceiving participants. In Moscovici’s (1969) study participants were told that they were taking part in a colour perception test. This also means that Moscovici did not gain participants informed consent. Although it is seen as unethical to deceive participants, Moscovici’s experiment required deception in order to achieve valid results. If participants were aware of the true aim of the experiment, they might have displayed demand characteristics and acted differently.