Minority influence

Question 1

Minority influence

Answer 1

A form of social influence in which a minority of people persuade others to adopt their beliefs, attitudes or behaviour. Leads to internalisation or conversion, in which private attitudes are changed as well as public behaviours

Question 2

Factors increasing minority influence

Answer 2

Consistency
Commitment
Flexibility
The process of change

Question 3

Impact of consistency on minority influence

Answer 3

If the minority take a consistent approach, people start to consider the issue more carefully:
Synchronic consistency
Diachronic consistency
Consistent action

Question 4

Synchronic consistency

Answer 4

They’re all saying the same thing - all members

Question 5

Diachronic consistency

Answer 5

They’ve been saying the same thing for some time

Question 6

Impact of commitment on minority influence

Answer 6

When a minority adopts a committed approach to its position, it may become difficult to ignore
Because joining a minority has a greater cost for the individual, they need to know the serious nature of the campaign or issue
Augmentation principle

Question 7

Augmentation principle

Answer 7

Majority pays attention when commitment to campaign when shown

Question 8

Impact of flexibility on minority influence

Answer 8

They must negate their position with the majority - have some flexibility/compromise to make changes
Balance between consistency and flexibility

Question 9

Impact of process of change on minority influence

Answer 9

When we listen to minority groups:
Consistent and passionate about something new
Deeper processing is important in the process of conversion to a different, minority view point.
Over time people are converted - the more it happens, the faster the rate of conversion

Question 10

Moscovici et al Minority influence method

Answer 10

This was a laboratory experiment investigating minority influence using 192 women.
In groups of six at a time, participants judged the colour of 36 slides. All of the slides were blue, but the brightness of the blue varied. Two of the six participants in the group were confederates.
In one condition, the confederates called all 36 slides ‘green’(consistent) and in another condition they called 24 ‘green’ and 12 ‘blue’(inconsistent). A control group was also used which contained no confederates.

Question 11

Moscovici et al results

Answer 11

In the control group, the participants called the slides green 0.25% of the time.
In the consistent condition, 8.4% of the time,participants adopted the minority position and called the slides ‘green’, and 32% of participants called the slides ‘green’ at least once.
In the inconsistent group, the participants moved to the minority position of calling the slides ‘green’ only 1.25% of the time.

Question 12

Moscivici et al conclusion

Answer 12

The confederates were in the minority, but their views appear to have influenced the real participants.
The use of the two conditions illustrated the minority had more influence when they were consistent in calling the slides ‘green.’

Question 13

Moscovici et al evaluation

Answer 13

Lacked ecological validity(artificial task/laboratory experiment)
The participants may have felt judging the colour of the slides was a trivial exercise, and they may have acted differently if their principles were involved.
The results cannot be generalised as only women participated.
As there was a control group, we know that the participants were actually influenced by the minority rather than being independently unsure of the colour of the slides.
In a similar experiment, participants were asked to write down the colour rather than saying it out loud. In this conclusion, even more people agreed with the minority, which provides more support for minority influence

Question 14

Research support for flexibility

Answer 14

Nemeth et al repeated Moscovici’s experiment, but instructed participants to answer witn all the colpurs they saw, rather than a single colour.
Three variations:
Said all of the slides were ‘green’
Said the slides were ‘green’ or ‘blue’ at random
Said the brighter sides were ‘green blue’ and the duller slides were ‘green’
Inconsistency had no effect on the participants.
Varied response - slightly effected participants
Consistent, but flexible.
2) Nemeth and Brilmayer studied the role of flexibility in a simulated jury situation - discussing the amount of compensation paid to someone in a ski lift accident.
Confederate who put forward an alternative view from the beginning and refused to change their mind - no effect on participants.
Confederate who compromised and changed their position late - exerted influence.

Question 15

Positive research support for consistency

Answer 15

Wood et al - meta analysis of 97 similar studies: consistent minorities were the most influential

Question 16

Meta analysis

Answer 16

Where we gather and analyse all the results of research carried out on a similar aim

Question 17

Evaluation: research support for depth of thought(commitment)

Answer 17

Martin et al:
Change to the minority position does involve deeper processing of ideas.
1. One group of participants heard a minority group endorsing the same view.
2. Another group of participants heard a majority group endorsing an initial view.
3. Participants were exposed to a conflicting view, and their support was measured again.
Participants were less willing to change their opinions if they listened to a minority group than a majority.
Suggested the minority message had been more deeply processed and had a more enduring effect.

Question 18

Artificial tasks - research against minority influence

Answer 18

Tasks involved are artificial
This is not generalisable to real life
Lacking in external validity

Extra real world application:
Majorities normally have a lot of power and status compared to minorities.
Minorities are committed to their cause - face hostile opposition(less confident than majorities in their viewpoint)