Psychology: Social Influence - Minority Influence

minority influence

what is minority influence?

• a small number influences a large group of people

• it’s more likely to lead to internalisation

• it’s less common than conformity

moscovici (key study)

aim

• investigate effects of consistency of minority influence

moscovici

procedure

• 172 american female ppts

• groups of 6 - asked to estimate colour of 36 slides

• all slides were blue but differing brightness/shades/hues

• 2/6 were confederates

• two conditions:

  > consistent (consistent answers) condition - confederates stated slides were green every time

  > inconsistent (inconsistent answers) condition - confederates stated green on 24 trials and blue on 12 trials

moscovici

findings

• consistent - 8.4% ppts conformed, 32% of ppts stated slide was green at least once

• inconsistent - 1.3% ppts conformed

• shows minority influence is much more effective when the majority are consistent in their responses + study drawn attention to the 3 factors involved in minority influence

STRENGTHS of moscovici’s study

• meta analysis of over 100 similar studies found that consistent minorities were more effective (Wood et al), shows that minorities being consistent is influential

• ppts got into groups of 4 and agree on the amount of compensation they would give to a victims of a ski lift accident (Nemeth):

  consistent condition - the minority argued low compensation rate and refused to change their mind

  inconsistent condition - minority initially argued low rate but later changed their mind and offered slightly higher rate > shows that flexibility is important factor as long as it is late

WEAKNESSES of moscovici’s study

• task is artificial so it is not representative of how minorities behave in real life, lacks external validity

• more problems arise when trying to apply explanations in real life, e.g. more to consider regarding minority and majority: majority have more power/status + minority are more committed to their cause due to the opposition they face from majority, therefore explanation can’t be used in real life as there are political and social factors that complicate minority influence which is not considered

3 factors involved in minority influence

• consistency

• commitment

• flexibility

(all of which makes people rethink their views)

what are the two types of consistency?

• synchronic

• diachronic

synchronic consistency

the minority all say the same thing

diachronic consistency

the minority all say the same thing for a long time

commitment

minority must demonstrate commitment to show they truly care like taking risks for their cause to prove it is worthwhile

flexibility

• being too consistent can be off putting - seen as dogmatic/rigid

minority needs to be accepting of counter arguments

5 social influence processes/stages in social change

(social change occurs when whole societies adopt new beliefs.

then they become widely accepted as the norm)

• drawing attention

• consistency

• augmentation principle

• snowball effect

• social cryptoamnesia

(+ some other processes)

drawing attention (1st stage)

for social change to occur the majority must be made aware of the need to change - social proof as evidence to convince them

consistency (2nd stage)

consistent message appears to be more credible and can convince a majority

augmentation principle (3rd stage)

the more people think about the issue the more likely they will be able to challenge the existing norm.

majority will think deeply about why minorities behave that way towards that cause

snowball effect (4th stage)

once minority viewpoint gets the attention of some majority members, more people will start paying attention

• viewpoint gathers momentum

social cryptoamnesia

majority is aware that a social change has happened but they are unaware of the source of the change and message - it has become disassociated/don’t remember how it happened

other processes

• NSI - social change encouraged by making people think that is what everyone else is doing and people change behaviour to fit that

• obedience: once you agree to one order you feel you have to obey the following orders, e.g. like Milgram’s study when administering the shocks

STRENGTHS of processes

• has supporting research:

  hung messages on people’s doors saying others were trying to reduce energy consumption every week for a month - they found that the energy people used decreased simply because they thought their neighbours were doing the same things

• evidence in real life situations:

  drink driving campaign in US - 20% admitted to drink driving,

  90% believed that other people in their age group were doing the same thing

  > meaning social change can be positive with measurable results - shows that NSI is a valid explanation for social change

WEAKNESSES of processes

• evidence from studies of ASCH, MOSCOVICI AND MILGRAM - all of this research are all artificial tasks, so it lacks of mundane realism + external validity and therefore the results can’t be generalised.

• history challenges the view:

  there’s only slow gradual change. Nemeth argues minority influence is very weak and delayed - attitudes towards smoking took decades to change

  > suggests that using minority influence as explanation for social change is limited as effects are weak