Social Influence : Minority Influence Flashcards
Evaluation minority influence : point 1 research supports consistency
Moscovici found that when 4 participants were placed in a room with 2 confederates who insisted a series of blue slides were green, when the confederates were consistent across all 36 trials, participants called the slides green 8.42% of the time.
This is in comparison to 1.25% who said that the slides were green when the confederates gave green responses on only 24 out of 36 times.
This supports the view that minorities can be influential, but that a lack of consistency reduces the influence of the minority.
Evaluation minority influence : point 2 Nemeth challenges consistency as most important factor
Nemeth et al used a simulated jury situation where group members discussed the amount of compensation to be paid to someone involved in a ski-lift accident.
When a confederate put forward an alternative point of view and refused to change his position, this had no effect on the other group members.
A confederate who compromised, and therefore showed some degree of shift towards the majority, did exert influence over the rest of the group.
This supports that view that consistency without flexibility is unlikely to lead to a minority being influential.
Evaluation minority influence : point 3 hard to convince people to dissent
In spite of the research suggesting that consistent but flexible minorities can be successful, according to Nemeth, it is still difficult to convince people to dissent.
People accept the principle on the surface to appear tolerant, but they quickly become irritated by a dissenting view that affects the harmony within the group.
As a result, we attempt to belittle the dissenting view. People are encouraged to ‘fit in’ and are marginalised by being associated with a ‘deviant’ point of view.
This means that in reality, the majority view tends to continue and it is difficult for minorities to break the status quo.
What are the aims of Moscovici ‘s study and what does it support ?
- Investigating effects of a consistent minority on a majority
- Re run of Asch’s study but in reverse (minority influence majority)
- Shows the role of a consistent minority ‘s influence
What are the procedures of Moscovici ‘s study ?
- Participants given eye tests to ensure they weren’t colour blind
- Placed in a group of 4 genuine participants and 2 confederates
- Shown 36 slides with clearly different shades of blue
- Asked to state the colour out loud
- 1st part : 2 confederates answered green on all trials + consistent
- 2nd part : 2 confederates answered green 24/36 trials + inconsistent
What were the findings of Moscovici ‘s study ?
- 8.42% consistent minority
- 1.25% inconsistent minority
- 32% of participants judged the slide to be green at least once
What were the conclusions of Moscovici’s study ?
Minorities can influence majorities, but not all the time and only when they behave in certain ways.
Evaluation of Moscovici’s study : point 1 (highly controlled)
is useful in helping our understanding of the processes involved in minority influence.
Moscovici was able to isolate the variable of consistency in the minority and demonstrate its effect on influencing the majority.
This allows us to make firm conclusions about the role of consistency in minority influence, which can then be applied to everyday life.
For example, it enables those who are wishing to be influential to know that they must remain consistent in their viewpoint if they are to have a realistic chance of changing the views of the majority.
Evaluation of Moscovici’s study : point 2 (problems with external validity)
The sample was small and only female, so we cannot assume that the rates of influence would apply equally to men.
Also, the set up was very artificial and used a trivial situation.
It is unlikely that participants cared very much about their answers.
This could have had an impact on the way the participants reacted.
Although it was useful in showing that minorities can be influential, it may not reflect how people react to a dissenting minority in a real-life situation as this may require the person to deviate from a strong opinion, meaning that the study cannot tell us about the success of minorities in real-life.
Evaluation of social change : point 1 support for crypto amnesia
Bashir et al found that participants were less likely to behave in environmentally friendly ways because they did not want to be associated with stereotypical environmentalists.
They rated environmental activists in negative ways, describing them as ‘tree huggers’, as a result this reduced people’s willingness to adopt social change behaviours that were advocated by activists.
Therefore to explain the recent shift to environmentally friendly behaviours
becoming the norm, social cryptoamnesia must have occurred. Society must have forgotten the source of where the message came from in order for social change to happen.
Evaluation of social change : point 2 evidence for role of majority in social change
Although social change is often initiated by minority groups there is evidence for the role of majority influence in social change. Nolan et al (2008) hung messages on the front doors of houses in San Diego, California that either told them that most residents were trying to reduce their energy usage, or asked them to reduce their energy usage, but made no reference to other residents. Nolan found significant decreases in energy usage in the first group only. Similarly Shultz
(2007) found 75% guests re-used their towels each day (rather than requiring a fresh one) when seeing the message ‘most guests in this room re use. This implies that people are more willing to change their habits if they believed a majority of others had done so too, and thus demonstrated how majority influence can play a part in bringing about social change.
Evaluation of social change : point 3 (useful applications in real life)
As a result of research future minority groups can apply the processes to bring about further social change.
Bashir’s advice to minorities hoping to create social change is to avoid behaving in ways that reinforce the stereotypes as this will always be off-putting to the majority they want to influence. One of the most significant examples of social change faced just this problem. The birth of communism owes much to the careful way in which an influential minority overcame a ‘deviant: problem. To avoid being portrayed as deviants, communists made it clear in their communist manifesto that they had no interests separate from those of the majority (the proletariat or working class). In fact, the communist minority emphasised the fact they were part of the proletariat, and that the struggle was actually with the Owners of the means of productions (the bourgeoisie).
