AO3

• Research evidence for consistency


  P: There is research evidence which supports the need for successful minorities to be consistent with each other and across time.

  E: Moscovici et al. (1969) conducted a study on a group of six people where they had to decide on 36 coloured slides on whether they were blue or green (all slides were blue). First group had 2 confederates who were consistent. The majority conformed to the minority for 32%. The second group had an inconsistent condition where confederates were inconsistent with their answers, causing agreement to fall to 1.25%.
• Research evidence for consistency (2)

  E: The third group was a control group with no confederates and participants got the colour of the slides wrong on 0.25% of the trials.

  E: This suggests that the minorities do need to show consistency with each other over time in order to be persuasive and for conversion from the majority to the minority view to occur.

  L: As such, we can conclude that consistency is a major factor in minority influence.
• Research evidence for flexibility in minority influence


  P: There is also supporting research for the concept of flexibility as part of minority influence.

  E: Nemeth (1987) constructed a mock jury in which participants and a confederate were instructed to discuss and agree upon an amount of compensation to give a ski lift accident victim. He found that when the confederate would not change from a low amount (which seemed unreasonable), the majority stuck together at a much higher amount. However, when the confederate changed his compensation offer (compromised), so did the majority.
• Research evidence for flexibility in minority influence (2)


  E: This suggests that flexibility in a minority influence allows the majority to take into account their view and compromise. The confederates and the participants came to an agreement, rather than just being consistent as it was unreasonable.

  L: Therefore, this makes the theory of minority influence valid.