Social Influence: Minority infuence AO3

Question 1

1st support:
What is the research support for consistency?

Answer 1

Moscovici et al’s study showed that a consistent minority opinion had greater effect on other people than an inconsistent one.

Question 2

2nd research support
What did Martin et al do in his research to provide support for depth of thought (PROCEDURE)?

Answer 2

Measure their support:
- Gave participant a message that supports a viewpoint
- One group of participants heard a minority group agree while another group heard from a majority group
- The participants were then exposed to a conflicting view

Question 3

RESEARCH SUPPORT FOR DEPTH OF THOUGHT
What are the findings for Martin et al’s research support for depth of thought?

Answer 3

• Participants were less willing to change opinions if they had listened to a minority group agree
• Suggests that minority message has been deeply processed

Question 4

1st limitation
Why does Moscovici et al’s study show artificial tasks?

Answer 4

• The tasks involved such as identifying the colour of a slide is artificial.
• Findings are lacking external validity because it is different from how minorities can influence a majority in real life (e.g. political campaigning)

Question 5

What does an artificial task mean?

Answer 5

They do not reflect real-life situations and less generalisable to real-life.

Question 6

2nd limitation
How does Moscovisci’s study lack real-world applications? GIve an example.

Answer 6

• Real life influence situation are much more complicated than Moscovici’s study
• Example, majorities in real life usually have more power and status such as political parties persuading you to vote for them.