Evaluation

• Lessons from conformity

  Research Dissenters make social change more likely Asch’s research demonstrated that when one Confederate always gave the correct answer, This broke the power of the majority –Encourage others to do likewise. Such dissent Has the potential to lead to social change. Majority influence and normative social Influence Environmental and health campaigners exploit Conformity by appealing to NSI. They provide Information about what others are doing. For Example, preventing young people from taking Up smoking (telling them that most other Young people do not smoke).
• Social change is Encouraged by drawing attention to what the Majority’s are actually doing.
• Lessons from obedience Research

  Disobedient models make social change more likely Milgram’s research demonstrated the importance of disobedient role models. In one of his variations. When one confederate refused to give shocks, the rate of obedience in genuine pps dropped significantly Gradual commitment leads to ‘drift’ Zimbardo (2007) suggested how obedience can be used to create social change – once a smaller commitment has been made it becomes more difficult to resist a bigger one. People ‘drift’ into a new kind of behaviour
• Research support for role of NSI

  In social change Nolan (2008) investigated whether majority influence led To a reduction in energy consumption in a community: the Researchers hung messages on the front doors of houses In San Diego, California every week for one month. The key message was that most residents were trying to Reduce their energy usage. As a control, some residents Had a different message that just asked them to save Energy but made no reference to other people’s Behaviour.
• Findings showed significant decreases in energy usage in The group that were informed ‘most residents’ were trying To reduce energy usage showing how conforming to a Majority group can lead to social change
• One limitation is that deeper processing may not play a Role in how minorities bring about social change. Some people are supposedly converted because they Think more deeply about the minority’s views. Diane Mackie (1987) disagrees and presents evidence that it is Majority influence that create deeper processing if you do Not share their views. This is because we like to believe that other people share Their views and think in the same way as us.
• When we find That a majority believes something different, then we are Forced to think long and hard about their arguments and Reasoning. This means that a central element of minority influence Has been challenged, casting doubt on its validity as an Explanation of social change. However, according to Nadia Bahir et al (2013) people still resist
• Social change.

  For example, Bashir et al found that their participants were less Likely to behave in environmentally friendly ways because they did Not want to be associated with stereotypical and minority Environmentalist. They describe environmental activists in negative Ways (e.g tree huggers). This means that, the message of the minority would have very little Impact because the majorities would be focusing on the source of The message (i.e environmentalists) rather than the message itself (to be environmentally friendly, reduce pollution).
• A strength is that psychologists can explain how minority Influence brings about social change. Charlan Nemeth (2009) claims social change is due to The type of thinking that minorities inspire. When people Consider minority arguments, they engage in divergent Thinking. This type of thinking is broad rather than narrow, in Which the thinker actively searchers for information and Weight up more options.
• Nemeth argued that this leads To better decisions and more creative solutions to social Issues. This shows why dissenting minorities are valuable- they Stimulate new ideas and open minds in a way that Majorities cannot.