minority influence

• whats minority influence ?

  a form of social influence where a minority (could be just one person) persuades others to adopt their beliefs, attitudes or behaviours. This leads to internalisation in which both public and private attitudes/behaviours are changed
• minorities are able to influence others if they show certain behaviour styles. If minority members are consistent with their beliefs and share the same ones/retain them over time it will make people reconsider their views saying 'they might have a point as they keep on talking about it'
• the minority needs to show they are committed to the cause, they may do this by either showing a willingness to risk harm to themselves or by showing their cause benefits wider society
• the minority must show a willingness to compromise/flexibility otherwise their thinking may be percieved as rigid and dogmatic, they must be willing to adapt their views by listening to counter arguments
• minorities must be persuasive and attract others by providing clear and justified arguments
• hat was the supporting study for flexibility ?

  nemeths mock jury
• nemeth aim ?

  to investigate flexbility as a key factor in minority influence
• what was nemeth procedure ?

  experiment based off a mock jury, groups of three participants and one confederate had to decide on the amount of compensation given to a ski-lift accident victim, condition 1 was the minority (confed) argued for a low rate and refused to change their position, condition 2 they argued for a low rate but compromised and offered a slightly higher one
• what were nemeths findings?

  in condition one the minority had no effect over majority, in condition two the majority were also more likely to compromise and change their view
• nemeth conclusion?

  highlights the importance of flexibility and questions the idea of consistency, this suggests a balance between the two is the most successful strategy for a minority to influence others
• whats the supporting evidence for consistency ?

  moscovicis study of minority influence
• moscovici aim?

  • To discover whether a minority could influence the views of a larger group​ and investigate the conditions needed for this
• what was moscovici procedure ?

  • Groups of six American females, all with no colour blindness​
  • 2 were confederates – the minority​
  • 4 were naïve participants – the majority​
  • Shown 36 blue slides of different shades​
  • ​2 conditions:
  • Consistent minority (confederates)said green on all trials​
  • ​
  • Inconsistent minority (confederates) said green on 2/3 of trials​
  • ​
  • Measured how many times the naïve majority (participants) said green​
• moscovici findings ?

  consistent minority, only 8% of trials showed minority influence with 32% of participants said green at least once, in the inconsistent minority only 1% of trials showed minority influence
• moscovici conclusion?

  minorities can be influential but only if consistent, therefore this is supporting evidence for consistency in a minority
• moscovici can be criticised for using a biased estrocentric sample, these means we cannot generalise the results to male who may show different levels of minority influence, this is quite likely as research into majority influence displays a difference in conformiy between men and women, therefore this lacks population validity
• • The study can be criticised for using a biased sample of Americas and is therefore ethnocentric. ​
  • As America is an individualistic society, we cannot generalise the results to collectivists who may show different levels of minority influence​
  • This is quite likely to be the case as research into majority influence does indeed show a difference in conformity between individualistic & collectivist societies​
  • Therefore, Moscovici’s research lacks population validity​
• • The research has been criticised for being artificial
  •  judging the colour of slides is not something that we need to do in everyday life​
  • This task has no reflection on real world minority influence such as political campaigning​
  • This study therefore lacks ecological validity as the results cannot be generalised to real life situations​
• • Moscovici has also been criticised for breaching ethical guidelines​
  • Ps were deceived as they believed it was a study on colour perception not minority influence​
  • This means they were not able to give fully informed consent​
  • However, it was necessary to deceive Ps because if they had known the true aim, they would have acted under demand characteristics and the study would have been invalid​
  • Ps were also debriefed afterwards​
  • It can also be argued that the knowledge gained about minority influence justifies the deception​
•  If minorities are consistent, committed, flexible and persuasive it can lead people to reconsider their views.​
• • The change then occurs via the Snowball effect ​
  • This is when the minority slowly becomes majority​
• • Zeitgeist (spirit of the time) There is often a delay before the minority position becomes accepted​
  • It happens when society is ready for change to occur​
  • Different eras produce different cultural outlooks​
  • Feminism, anti-racism and an increasingly liberal attitude towards homosexuality were just some of the major attitudinal shifts that came from the zeitgeist of the 1960s.​
• • Consistency: MLK & Nelson Mandela led civil rights movements & were consistent in their views against apartheid for many years​
• • Commitment: Rosa Parkes knew that she was risking arrest when she refused to give up her bus seat for a white man. This event helped to trigger the end of racial segregation​
• committment: The suffragettes risked imprisonment and even death for those who went on hunger strike. Such commitment influenced other to reconsider & eventually women gained the right to vote​
• • Persuasiveness: Smoking ban campaign used medical evidence to show how damaging smoking & passive smoking is for health. There was also some flexibility as smoking is still allowed in outside spaces​
• Snowball effect: Gay rights – over time more and more people began to accept homosexuality. The majority now believe in equal rights such as gay marriage
• • Zeitgeist: Recycling – society is now very aware of the problems with rubbish e.g. plastics polluting the planet. Many people who did not recycle in the past now understand the importance to do so and are now ready to recycle​
• • A criticism of research into how minorities can bring about social change is that minority influence is often indirect & delayed. ​
  • It is claimed that the majority will only respond to issues that are important at a given time ​
  • Eg it took decades for the smoking ban & for drink drive laws to be implemented. It also took decades for the majority to care enough about climate change to take action. ​
  • This time delay could therefore be seen as a limitation to using minority influence to explain social change. ​
• • However, social change may not happen readily. One study investigated why people often resist social change even when they agree it is necessary ​
  • Eg researchers found that Ps were less likely to behave in environmentally friendly ways because they did not want to be associated with being a stereotypical ‘environmentalist’​
  • Ps rated environmental activists & feminists in negative ways describing them as ‘tree huggers’ or ‘man haters’. ​
  • Therefore, the researchers advice to minorities hoping to bring about social change is to avoid behaving in ways that reinforce stereotypes​
• • Social change can occur when a majority influences a minority through the process of normative social influence. ​
  • As it is a majority changing the minority it is a passive process as no big changes are occurring. ​
  • It is not actively sought out (whereas a minority group actively causes social change)​
• support for the role of conformity in social change /A month long study was conducted in California ​

  • Experimental group: messages were hung on people’s front doors encouraging them to reduce energy consumption by indicating that other residents in the area were already doing this​
  • Control group: some houses received messages about energy use but with no mention of the behaviour of other residents ​
  • The experimental group significantly reduced their energy consumption showing that conformity can lead to positive change​
• obedience and social influence?

  • Disobedient role models can bring about social change​
  • E.g. in Milgram’s study when they were 2 disobedient allies who refused to give a shock, obedience dropped to 10%​
  • Obedience can also bring about social change through graduated commitment​
  • Once a small instruction is obeyed, it becomes much more difficult to resist a bigger one​
  • People therefore ‘drift’ into a new kind of behaviour​
• One study investigated why people often resist social change even when they agree it is necessary.
• Researchers found that people are less likely to behave in environmentally friendly ways because they do not want to be associated with being a stereotypical 'environmentalist'.
• People rate environmental activists and feminists in negative ways, describing them as 'tree huggers' or 'man haters'.
• The researchers' advice to groups hoping to bring about social change is to avoid behaving in ways that reinforce stereotypes.
• • One study investigated why people often resist social change even when they agree it is necessary​
  • E.g. researchers found that Ps were less likely to behave in environmentally friendly ways because they did not want to be associated with being a stereotypical ‘environmentalist’​
  • Ps rated environmental activists & feminists in negative ways describing them as ‘tree huggers’ or ‘man haters’ ​
  • Therefore the researchers advice to groups hoping to bring about social change is to avoid behaving in ways that reinforce stereotypes