minority influence

majority influence

When the majority of a group tries to influence others in the group to conform to their beliefs

minority influence

the case where a minority of group members influences the behaviour or beliefs of the majority

Moscovici et al (1969) aim

To investigate the effects of a consistent minority on a majority

Moscovici et al (1969) method

- the all female group of participants were first given an eye test (128 participants)

- to test that they were not colourblind

- they were split into 32 groups of 4

- they added 2 confederates to each group

- they were all shown 36 slides that were different shades of blue and asked to state the colour out loud

- confederates were instructed to say green instead

there were two experimental groups in the experiment;

- group 1 = the confederates were consistent and answered green for every slide

- group 2 = the confederates were inconsistent and answered green 24 times and blue 12 times

Moscovici et al (1969) results

- in group 1 (consistent group), 8.42% of trails resulted in participants answering green (agreeing with minority) and 32% of the participants agreed at least once

- in group 2 (inconsistent group), 1.25% of trails resulted in participants answering green

Moscovici et al (1969) conclusion

Minority groups had more influence when they behaved consistently rather than inconsistently.

Although the results are small, the results are significantly different, therefore consistency is the important variable

consistency

Minority influence is most effective if the minority keeps the same beliefs, both over time and between all the individuals that form the minority. It's effective because it draws attention to the minority view.

commitment

Minority influence is more powerful if the minority demonstrates dedication to their position, for example, by making personal sacrifices. This is effective because it shows the minority is not acting out of self-interest.

flexibility

Relentless consistency could be counter-productive if it is seen by the majority as unbending and unreasonable. Therefore minority influence is more effective if the minority show flexibility by accepting the possibility of compromise.

what consistency looks like

keeping the same beliefs over time (diachronic consistency) and between all members of the minority (synchronic consistency)

what commitment looks like

might engage in extreme activities which present some risk to the minority group because this shows greater commitment (augmentation principle)

what flexibility looks like

listen to counter arguments, be prepared to compromise or adapt point of view, take one step at a time

consistency evaluation

+

- Moscovici research supports this that minority influence people's decisions

-

- not all research supports this, Schacter (1951) where social workers talked about 'Johnny Rocco' a troublesome youth and the majority talked about a mixture of support and discipline, while a minority talked about harsh punishment, and when they majority couldn't sway him they voted him out and ignored him

flexibility evaluation

+

-Nemeth et al (1974) modified Moscovici study by including three conditions and had two confederates who said half were green and half blue, in the second they said dim slides were green-blue and brighter slides green, in the final condition they said all were green, second condition produced most minority influence (21%) as they weren't unreasonable or rigid

commitment evaluation

-

- if majority sees a minority has self interest in their campaign they are less likely to be influenced by them, Mass and Clark (1982) found that gay minority arguing for gay rights was seen as having less self interest than heterosexual minority arguing for same cause, commitment is important to gain attention to the minority but it can be seen as having self interest