A03 Minority Influence

• Evaluation of Minority Influence - A03?

  +Research evidence shows importance of consistency (Moscovici)

  +Research support involvement of internalisation in minority influence (Moscovici)

  -Methodological Issues

  +Research support shows change to minority position involves DEEPER thought vs change to majority - minority influence A03

  -Applications of minority influence research are limited - minority influence A03
• Research evidence shows importance of consistency? - PART 1 - A03 minority influence

  P: Research by Moscovici et al supports the importance of consistency within minority groups. MOSCOVIVI STUDY IN FC

  E: In their study looked at how much the minority were affected by a minority (2 confederates) depending on whether they varied in their answers (all slides actually blue)

  E: Found 8.4% conformity when the minority stated all slides were green vs only 1.25% when they stated 2/3 green. 1/3 blue - found a consistent minority had greater effect on other people than inconsistent opinion.
• Research evidence shows importance of consistency? - PART 2 - A03 minority influence


  E: Wood et al (1994) conducted meta-analysis of almost 100 similar studies and found that minorities seen as consistent were most influential.

  L: This shows how minority can persuade the majority more effectively just by the consistency of their argument. Confirms consistency major factor in minority influence.
• Research support S involvement of internalisation in minority influence - A03- PART 1

  P: The variation of Moscovici useful for showing extent of social change brought about by the minority

  E: In variation ppt allowed to write answers down in private rather stating them aloud.

  E: Results shows agreement with minority was greater - greater behaviour change from majority (complete opposite of Asch)
• Research support involvement of internalisation in minority influence - A03- PART 2


  L: Showing ppt experienced internalisation but did not want to be seen to be associated with minority in eyes of majority. Shows people may be influence by minority but don't want to admit it thus effect of the minority is not apparent.
• Methodological issues - minority influence A03 - PART 1


  P: There multiple methodological issues in studies like Moscovici

  E: Trivial task of identifying slide colours doesn't reflect real life situations of social influence (far removed from how minorities try influence majorities in real life) - thus lack external validity & limited in what they tell us about how minority influence works in real-life. Additionally ppt made of females students = not generalisable to other groups
• Methodological issues - minority influence A03 - PART 2


  E: BUT, this doesn't mean link between social influence & social change is non existent. Wood gave evidence in his meta analysis minimising impact of above criticism
• Research support shows change to minority position involves DEEPER thought vs change to majority - minority influence A03


  P: Martin et al (2003) gave ppt message supporting particular viewpoint, & attitudes measured. Then they heard endorsement of view from either minority or majority. Finally, they heard conflicting view: attitudes measured again.

  E: People less willing to change their opinions to new conflicting view if they had listened to minority group than if they listened to a majority group.

  L: Suggest the minority message had been more deeply processed & had more enduring effect.
• Applications of minority influence research are limited - minority influence A03


  P: Studies make a clear distinction between majority and minority, but real-life situations are more complicated

  E: The difference is about more than just numbers. Majorities usually have power & status. Minorities are committed and tight-knit groups whose members know & support each other.

  L: Minority influence research rarely reflects the dynamics of these groups so findings may not apply to real-life minority influence situations which exert a more powerful influence.