evaluation of minority influence

research support (for consistency)

Research to support effectiveness of minority influence comes from Moscovici et al(1969)

Moscovici found that in a lab experiment with female participants and two confederates, that when the confederates agreed with each other when estimating a colour, the real participant agreed with the confederates 8.42% of the trials, BUT when the confederates weren’t consistent, only 1.25% of participants would agree.

This shows how’s consistent minority has a greater effect on people than an inconsistent minority, showing how consistency is importanr.

research support (for flexibility)

Research to support the idea that flexibility paired with consistency helps minority influence

Nemeth(1986) created groups of 3 participants with 1 confederate, they all had to decide how much compensation to pay for an accident. When the confederates argued consistently for a low amount, no one agreed. However, when he compromised to a lower amount, everyone/participants agreed.

This shows how minorities have to be flexible, suggesting how most successful approach would be a balance between flexibility and consistency.

limitation (validity)

A limitation of the research is that it lacks external validity.

Both Moscovici and Nemeth’s research lack ecological validity as their experiments took place in labs, meaning that caution must be taken when using the findings. Also, Moscovici had only used female participants, meaning that his research lacks population validity as the sample is biased.

Careful consideration must be taken with the validity of the findings of the research findings.

identification must be considered

There may be other factors such as identification, as well flexibility, commitment and consistency.

Mass et al(1982) had a minority arguing for homosexual rights to a straight majority, he found out that if the minority was gay, then they were less persuasive in changing the minds of the straight majority than if the minority had been straight. This is because the straight majority identifies with the straight minority, making them more persuasive.

This suggests that other factors must be taken into consideration.