The role of social influence processes in social change.

• How does drawing attention bring social change?

  Segregation in 1950s America — places such as schools and certain restaurants in the southern states were exclusive to whites. Civil rights marches drew to the situation by attention providing social proof of the problem
• How does consistency bring social change?

  People took part in the marches on a large scale. Even though it was a minority of the American population they displayed consistency of message and intent.
• How does deeper processing bring social change?

  This activism meant that many people who had accepted the status quo began thinking deeply about the unjustness of it
• How does the augmentation principle bring social change?

  'Freedom riders' were both white as well as black people who boarded buses in the south to challenge separate seating for black people. Many were beaten. The personal risk strengthened (augmented) their message.
• How does the snowball effect bring social change?

  Civil rights activists (e.g. Martin Luther King) gradually got the attention of the US government. In 1964 the Civil Rights Act was passed. Change happens bit by bit just as a rolling snowball grows as it gathers more snow.
• How does social cryptomnesia bring social change?

  Social change came about but some people have no memory (cryptomnesia) of the events leading to that change.
• How do dissenters make social change more likely?

  Asch's research — variation where one confederate always gave correct answers. This broke the power of the majority encouraging others to dissent. This demonstrates potential for social change.
• How does normative social influence make social change more likely?

  Environmental and health campaigns exploit conformity by appealing to NSI. They provide information about what others are doing, e.g. reducing litter by printing normative messages on bins ('Bin itothers do').
• How does disobedient models make change more likely?

  Milgram's research: disobedient models in the variation where a confederate refused to give shocks. The rate of obedience in genuine participants plummeted.
• How does gradual commitment leads to 'drift'?


  Zimbardo (2007) — once a small instruction is obeyed, it becomes more difficult to resist a bigger one. People 'drift' into a new kind of behaviour.
• What is a strength of normative influence in social change? (support)

  P - one strength is support for normative influence in social change.

  E - Nolan et al. (2008) hung messages on front doors of houses. The key message was most residents are trying to reduce energy usage.

  E - Significant decreases in energy use compared to control group who saw messages to save energy with no reference to other people's behaviour.

  L - This shows conformity can lead to social change through the operation of NSI.

  C - Exposing people to social norms does not always change their behaviour. Foxcroft et al. (2015) reviewed 70 studies of programmes using social norms to reduce alcohol intake. There was only a small effect on drinking quantity and no effect on drinking frequen% This shows that NSI does not always produce long-term social change.
• What is a strength of minority influence in social change? (explains social change)

  P - Another strength is that minority influence explains social change.

  E - Nemeth (2009) says that minority arguments cause people to engage in divergent thinking (broad, active information search, more options).

  E - This thinking leads to better decisions and creative solutions to social problems.

  L - This shows that minorities are valuable because they stimulate new ideas and open people's minds.
• What is a limitation of minority influence in social change? (deeper processing)

  P - Another limitation is deeper processing may apply to majority influence.

  E - Mackie (1987) disagrees with the view that minority influence causes individuals in the majority to think deeply about an issue

  E - Majority influence creates deeper processing because we believe others think as we do. When a majority thinks differently, this creates pressure to think about their views.

  L - Therefore a central element of minority influence has been challenged, casting doubt on its validity as an explanation of social change.