Part 8: Minority influence,

• Minority influence: A form of social influence in which a minority of people (sometimes just one) persuade others to adopt their beliefs, attitudes, or behaviours. Leads to Internalisation in which private attitudes are changed as well as public behaviours and is a permanent change. Minorities need to have the following qualities to be influential and bring about social change.
• Moscovici's study: Participants - Randomly selected participants and confederates. Aim - To observe how minorities can influence a majority. Procedure - Lab experiment, Participants were in a group where there were two confederates (minority) and four participants (majority). Shown 36 blue slides, each with a different shade of blue. Asked to say whether the slide was blue or green...
• ...Confederates deliberately said they were green on two-thirds of the trials, thus producing a consistent minority view. Number of times that the real participants reported that the slide was green was observed. A control group was also used consisting of participants only – no confederates. Findings - When confederates were consistent in their answers about 8% of participants said slides were green. However, when the confederates answered inconsistently about 1% of participants said the slides were green. Showing consistency is crucial for a minority to exert maximum influence on a majority.
• Moscovici’s study clearly demonstrates the role of consistency in minority influence: Majority more likely to be influenced by the minority when the minority is consistent in their views. As it makes the opposition think that the views of the minority are real and serious enough to pay attention to (augmentation principle), if they are so determined to stay consistent...
• ...If all members share the same views (synchronic), then it can convince the majority that there is something worth agreeing with. Remaining consistent over time (diachronic synchrony) forces the opposition to rethink their own views repeatedly over time and generates more doubt due to the conflicting views, and that an alternative view is available. Allowing more opportunity to be influenced.
• Commitment: Majority is more likely to be influenced by the minority when the minority is committed, because when the minority have so much passion and confidence in their point of view, it suggests to the majority that their view must somehow be valid, and it encourages them to explore why, offering more opportunity to be influenced.
• Flexibility: Majority is more likely to be influenced by the minority when the minority is flexible. Being too consistent can suggest that the minority is inflexible, uncompromising and irrational, making their argument less appealing to the majority. However, if they appear flexible, compromising and rational, they are less likely to be seen as extremists and attention seekers. More likely to be seen as reasonable, considerate and cooperative.
• If a minority is successful in the above it can lead to the 'Snowball Effect': When overtime increasing numbers of people switch from majority position to minority. They have become 'converted'. Gradually, minority view becomes new majority view thus change has occurred. They have internalised minority's position.
• (+)Martin et al. (2003) demonstrated that there is a greater degree of Internalisation of a minority view, compared to a majority view - In study, one group heard the opinion of a minority group whilst the second group heard the opinion of a majority group. After both groups were exposed to an opposing opinion, the group who’d heard the minority view were significantly less likely to change their own views. Suggests that a minority is more powerful because it holds risk (augmentation principle) and so forces the audience to reconsider their own views.
• (+)Supported by Moscovici (1969) - Consistency increases minority influence. Group of 6 were asked to view a set of 36 blue-coloured slides that varied in intensity and state whether blue or green. In each group, 2 confederates consistently said slides were green. Thus, consistent minority opinion had greater effect of changing views than an inconsistent condition so its a aiding factor in minority influence.
• (+)Flexibility - Nemeth et al (1987) stimulated a jury situation regarding compensation to pay in accident. Confederate placed alternative view and refused to change position, but no effect on others. A confederate who compromised, thus showed some degree of shift towards majority, did exert influence on the rest. However, influence only evident in those who shifted late in negotiations (flexibility) rather then those who shifted earlier (perceived as having 'caved in' to majority). Flexibility is limited in its function as only effective at changing minority opinion in certain circumstances.
• (+)Tipping point - Xie et al (2011) discovered a 'tipping point' where number of people holding minority position becomes sufficient to change majority opinion. They developed computer models of social networks with individuals free to 'chat'. Each person held a 'traditional' view but researchers added some showing, consistently, an alterative viewpoint...
• ...If same opinion held, then reinforced opposition's belief and thus adopted it. If different option, it would be considered but then moved onto someone else. After a while, opinion suddenly began to shift. Study concluded that percentage necessary to tip majority into minority was just 10%, thus supporting minority influence and snowball effect.
• (-)Power of minority influence - Moscovici's research, the figure for agreement with a consistent minority was very low, on average only 8%. Suggests that its a quiet rate and not useful concept.
• (-) Low in ecological validity - A key issue with Moscovici’s study in particular is the reliance on artificial tasks and stimuli. This means that such methodology lacks mundane realism because the tasks do not reflect the scenarios within which minority groups would act in real life and is far removed. Also means that the findings are likely to lack ecological validity because the extent to which the results can be generalised is limited.